Chicago History | Summer 1978

Chicago History SUMMER 1978

$2.00

'"' ___ UNES BEACHES -

DROPA NICKEL PLEASE

WORDS ALYCE LICHTENSTEIN MUSIC JOSEPHINE COHEN

The telephone featured prominently in this song published in 1911 . See page 82. Ill inois Bell.

Q)t1.vi.1H f't'Y~ ,~~• • ') ,, f

Chicago History The Magazine of the Chicago Historical Society

SUMMER 1978 VOLUME VII, NUMBER 2

Fannia Weingartner Editor

CONTENTS

Gail Farr Casterline Assistant Editor

THE NECESSARY TOY: THE TELEPHONE COMES TO CHICAGO/70

by Robert H. Glauber

Harold L. Augustus Designer Walter W. Krutz Paul W. Petraitis Photography

CATHOLIC EDUCATION IN CHICAGO: THE FORMATIVE YEARS 1840-1890/87

by Timothy Walch A HERITAGE FORGOTTEN: CHICAGO'S FIRST CAST IRON BUILDINGS/98

by Margot Gayle WILLIAM DEVER AND PROHIBITION: THE MAYORAL ELECTIONS OF 1923 AND 1927/109

by Douglas Bukowski LIBRARY EXHIBIT/119 LOOKING BACKWARD Celebrating the Fourth of July/120 REVIEWS/123 THE SOCIETY/130 NOTES/131

Cover: Poster designed by Hazel Brown Urgelles for the South Shore & South Bend Railroad, 1925. CHS .

Copyrig ht 1978 by the Chicago Historical Society Clark Street at North Avenue Chicago, Illinois 60614 Articles appearing in this journal are abstracted and indexed in Historical Abstracts and America: History and Life

Operator Margaret Gottschalk in 1916 wearing the kind of headset in use from the turn of th e century until 1940. Illinois Bell.

70

Ch icago History

The Necessary Toy: The Telephone Comes to Chicago

BY ROBERT H. GLAUSER

It is not too much to say that the telephone makes modern society possible, that no substitutionfor it would suffice. n Margaret Mead <<

10, 1876, Alexander Graham Bell made the first telephone call. With the stressful senLence, "Mr. Watson, come here, I want you!" the world shrank. Instant voice communication over distance (something men had striven after for almost a century) became a reality. The consequences of Bell's success did not, of course, become manifest at once nor did their full potential affect people immediately. But as the use of the telephone rapidly spread, it changed people's lives, attitudes, and expectations.

Now the telephone and its services are taken for granted: we build around it, count on it, use it by instinct rather than conscious planning.

It has become a natural extension of our voice and tyle. Tow, as political scientist Ithiel de Sola Pool has pointed out, it plays a pivotal role in "magnify[ing] whatever processes [are] taking place in society at a given time."

In 1877 the telegraph dominated communications in Chicago. Telegraph poles and wires made stark patterns against the downtown sky.

Several companies provided the service and a small army of uniformed boys scurried through the streets delivering messages. As the number of telegrams grew, sending and delivering them became an increasing problem. Delays were frequent, errors not uncommon. Conditions were ripe for change.

ON MARCH

Senior writer and curator for Illinois Bell, Robert H. Glauber has written for encyclopedias, maga7ines, newspapers, and television.

A liule more than a year after Bell's first call, the telephone appeared in Chicago. It was brought by Gardiner Greene Hubbard. He had six instruments and he meant to promote them.

From the start Hubbard had a financia l interest in the telephone. In May 1877, he and Thomas Watson issued a circular touLing the instrument. It read, in part: Conversation can be carried on after sl ight practice and with the occasional repetition of a word or sentence .... After a few trials the ear becomes accustomed to the peculiar sou nd and finds little difficulty in understanding the words.

The advantages of the Telephone over the Telegraph ... are: 1st. That no skilled operator is required, but direct communication may be had by speech without the intervention of a third person.

2d. That the communication is much more rapid ...

3d. That no expense is required either for its operation, maintenance, or repair. It needs no battery, and has no complicated machinery. It is unsurpassed for economy and simplicity.

The advertisement then gets clown to figures and warrantees. "The Terms for leasing two Telephones for social purposes ... will be $20 a year, for business purposes $40 a year, payable semiannually in advance .... The instruments will be kept in good working order by the le sors, free of expense, except from inj u ries resulting from great carelessness." So the basic appeals of the telephone were established early

by Watson and Hubbard. They have not cha nged essentially in the ensuing century.

Chicago History

71

The Telephone in Chicago

Soon after Hubbard arrived in Chicago in June 1877, he called on General Anson Stager, the leading telegraph man in the city. It was a logical choice. Stager ¡was a principal of the Ameri can District Telegraph Company, president of ¡w estern Electric Manufacturing Company, and vice president of the ,vestern Union Telegraph Company . Stager authori zed Charles Summers, an electrician with the \Vestern Union Telegraph Company, to test the two telephones Hubbard had left with him.

Summers later testified at a patent hearing in 1881: "I believe I made the first telephone experiments with Bell instruments ever made in Chicago, using them almost every clay for a month or two after I obtained them." These experiments stirred up enough interest to induce one newspaper to keep a reporter on the story. He wrote: At 10 o'clock on yesterday morning a wonderful test was made of Bell's telephone between the Western Union telegraph office, Chicago, and the residence of Mr. C. H. Summers, in Highwood, Ill ., a distance of about twenty-two miles, one of the Western Union telegraph wires being used for the purpose. At the Chicago end were Gen . Sheridan , and several of his staff, Gen. Stager . .. and other notables, Mr. Summers and family being at the remote end . ... After some preliminary tests, l\Ir. F. W. Jones (without Ir. Summers' knowledge) spoke in the Chicago instrument and said: "Good morning, Summers. Do you know my voice?" Reply

by Summers: "Good morning. It is Jones ."

Jones: How are you all today?

Summers: All first-rate. What is your weather?

J.: Partly cloudy, and sultry.

S.: Cloudy and warm here.

J.: Gen. Sheridan is here and would like some music by telegraph [sic].

S.: Who? J.: Gen. Sheridan.

S.: Good morn ing, general. What will you have?

Gen . Sheridan: Please play on your flute for us.

This request was readily granted, and every note and variation was distinctly heard by all those present.

Gen. S.: That is splendid.

Summers: We will sing you a song if desired.

Gen. S.: Thank you. Do so.

72

Chicago History

"Swee t By-and-By" was beautifully r endered . .. all the parts being readily distinguished. [Chicago Tim es, June 25, 1877]

Thus, in one of the earliest telephone calls in Chicago, a familiar use of telephone lines was established at once-information about the weather was sought and given.

But not all the early tests of the telephone in Chicago were quite so social. At about the same time Summers was singing, Leroy Firman, general manager of the American District Telegraph Company, conducted some useful tests with the Fire Patrol. Instead of telegraphing the patrol the location of a fire, he had a telephone attached to the same wire so that the location could be given verbally. It worked relatively well; the only real problem was that the fire horses made so much noise when the alarm bell sounded that it was difficult to hear on the telephone.

There were many other experiments to test the versatility and reliability of "Bell's telephone." One involved City Hall (then located at LaSalle and Quincy streets) and a system for calling messenger boys quickly. Unfortunately, it worked in only one direction . In another experiment, Firman tried to use water pipes as telephone conductors. It didn ' t work.

In the main, however, everyone was more than satisfied with the performance of the new device "for the transmission of articulate speech" and excited about its potential for business and for social life. The telephone was obviously going to be both popular and profitable. In the fall of 1877 Hubbard wrote to the Board of Managers of the Bell Telephone Company in Boston that he was having good success finding agents to take on telephone franchises . He noted: "Negotiations are pending with Gen. Stager of Chicago."

That phrase covered a ticklish situation. For while Stager was interested in the performance potential of Bell's instrument and held on to his option to become the Bell agent in Chicago, he was also encouraging the companies in which

The Telephone in Chicago

he already had interests to go into direct competition with Bell. Hubbard, knowing nothing of this, continued to woo Stager. Several competing telephones were eventually made by Stager companies but proved short-lived since the courts declared them infringements on Bell's patents.

But there were those who didn't care to wait for a full-time agent to be appointed. On July 2, 1877, while Summers and Firman were still experimenting, a private line telephone service was set up between the headquarters of N. K. Fairbank and Company on Dearborn Street and the firm's lard and oil factory at Blackwell and 19th streets. Business started the bells ringing.

Horace Eldred joined the Bell Telephone Company of Boston in January 1878 and worked for it in St. Louis, Louisville, and Cincinnati. On April 19 he wrote to Gardiner Hubbard to ask, "What is being done in Chicago?" The response was his transfer to Chicago in late May. He was sent to design, install, and promote the first telephone exchange there.

Three men assisted him: .John Taubold, a lineman; William Murray, superintendent of construction; and Edwin Poindexter, a solicitorsalesman.

Eldred worked on the exchange designs, applied for a franchise from the City of Chicago, hired local workers, and purchased the necessary materials. Poindexter sold the services of the new exchange to businesses around town. The team worked quickly, smoothly, and successfully.

Everyone involved with the early telephones recognized that their usefulness was greatly restricted because they could operate only in pairs-one instrument connected directly to the other. You spoke back and forth along a single wire. As early as May 1877 Bell had lectured on the potential importance of a "telephone exchange"-eq uipment that had yet to be perfected. Such an exchange would make it possible for any telephone in a town to be connected with any other one through a central office.

The first commercial telephone . The round opening served both as transmitter and receiver. Developed by Bell in 1876 it went into service in 1877. American Telephone and Telegraph.

The first central exchange was established in Boston in May 1877 almost as Bell was talking.

It served a private burglar alarm system. The first commercial exchange opened in ew Haven, Connecticut, on January 28, 1878. It did not take Poindexter long to gather 33 interested subscribers to the Chicago Telephonic Exchange, "Licensed under Alex. Graham Bell Patents."

In late May an advertisement was issued listing their names and inviting other businesses to join the Exchange. Its operation was descr ibed as follows: "Any subscriber desiring to communicate with any other subscriber not on their wire, notifies the Central Office to make necessary connections, and immediately the communication is established .... The Lines, Call-Bell and Telephone are furnished and maintained at a monthly rental." At least three of the initial subscribers are still in the directory. Their original listing read: "Chicago North-Western R.R . . . .

U.S. Post Office ... Illinois Central R .R." Not everything went without hitch. The city council of Chicago took its time granting the franchise. Western Union strongly urged Eldred to join forces with them, as had been done in St. Louis, arguing that "if both go ahead there [would be] no money for either." But the public was enthusiastic. On June 24, 1878, Eldred published a Notice to Subscribers informing them that the Chicago Telephonic Exchange h ad Ch icago History

73

Gardiner Green Hubbard brought the first Bell telephone to Chicago in June 1877. Within a year Bell Telephone and the American District Telegraph Co. had both established exchanges in the city. Illinois Bell.

General Anson Stager was a leading figure in various communication enterprises in the city, including Western Union Telegraph Company , Western Electric Manufacturing Company, and the American Speaking Telephone Company. Illinois Bell.

secured the top floors of buildings 123 and 125 LaSalle Street, for our Central Office. Business Office, first floor, Room C, of No. 125 .... Having now 267 subscribers, embracing all lines of trades, we have insured, beyond question, success of our enterprise in this city. Our office will be open for business, ·wednesday, June 26.

Company, A.D.T. opened its exchange at 118 LaSalle Street with Leroy Firman as general manager on or about .June 18, a week before Eldred opened the Bell exchange.

At first, ·w estern Union had not been interested in the telephone. In the fall of 1876, Gardiner Hubbard had offered vVestern all of Bell's patents £or $100,000 but William Orton, the company's president, turned them clown. As Thomas \,Vatson noted in his memoirs: "The Company evidently had no faith in the future of the telephone £or they refused to buy the patents and wouldn't even make an offer for them." Because they needed money to continue their work, Bell and \Vatson were disappointed-but not for very long. Watson further recalled, "Two years later the same patents could not have been bought £or twenty-five million dollars."

Within a year of Bell's offer, \Vestern Union had changed its mind. Under the urging of men like Anson Stager, the company aggressively entered the telephone field. By 1878 its subsidiaries were producing instruments that used a transmitter developed by Thomas Edison and a receiver by Elisha Gray. Its sales force was large and hard-hitting. By early 1879 Western Union had more telephones and exchanges in service

So, with 267 pioneers behind them, the first Bell exchange was opened in Chicago in a small building located at what now would be just south of the alley on the east side of LaSalle Street between V1Tashington and l\fadison.

Money had not yet been raised locally, so financing for the exchange came from the Bell Telephone Company in Boston. In October 1878 the company issued its first proper alphabetical and classified directory. It carried 291 listings.

But this was not the first telephone exchange in Chicago. Eldred and his crew had been beaten by the American District Telegraph Company. This corporation had been chartered in Illinois in 1875 to provide telegraph and messenger services. Its financial backers were Anson Stager (who owned 30,000 worth of the initial $50,000 of capital stock), Norman Williams, John B. Drake, E. B. Chandler, and L.B. Firman. Working with a ·western Union subsidiary, the American Speaking Telephone 74

Chi cago History

l

The Mercantile Building at 118 LaSalle Street. In 1878 the American District Telephone Company established its exchange in the quarters here designated as the premises of Williams & Montgomery Insurance. CHS.

Telegraph wires dominate this view looking south on LaSalle Street from north of Washington. The first offices of the Bell Telephone Company in Chicago were located in this block at 123-125 LaSalle. Illinois Bell.

than did Bell. Neither company was about to give up what was proving to be a very lucrative market.

A patent infringement suit had been filed by Bell against Western (technically, against Peter A. Dowd, a Western Union agent) in September 1878. The case dragged on. The evidence was voluminous and complex-more than 600 pages of testimony and thousands of documents. To most the case seemed clear-cut: Bell had filed his patent application in 1876 and Western had come along later. Justice was on his side.

On November 10, 1879 a settlement was reached out of court. Western Union agreed to get out of the telephone business and to turn over to Bell a network of 56,000 telephones in 55 cities in exchange for a healthy financial settlement extending over the life of the Bell patents. Bell companies now had the right to a legal monopoly over all the telephone service in the country until Bell's initial patents ran out in 1893 and 1894.

It was "probably the greate t victory in the whole hi tory of the world's largest corporation," wrote John Brooks in his book, T elephone.

Thomas ,vatson celebrated by going to the shore at Marblehead and "declaiming to the skies all the poetry I remembered. It was an un-

dignified thing for the Chief Engineer of the Telephone Company to do ... but I certainly felt better for it next day."

Meanwhile, back on LaSalle Street, business flourished for both the Bell and A.D.T. exchanges. The number of customers rose rapidly.

The primitive equipment was pushed to its technical limits and then expanded with jerrybuilt improvements. The central offices were crowded, noisy, and inefficient. The operators making the connections and disconnects yelled back and forth at one another and shouted at the customers to make themselves heard.

In a letter of reminiscence George H. Bell, who was probably the first telephone operator in Chicago, recalled how makeshift it all was.

"Early in June 1878," he wrote, "I was an A.D.T. [messenger] boy sitting in the waiting line of a dozen boys one morning when the telephone solicitor came in with Mr. Ensley, our manager. ... Mr. Ensley asked me to step up, saying, 'This boy is George Bell. Bell invented it and Bell may as well operate it.' And so I went to work [as an operator]." 'Without any training, he was put on the board.

Bell was probably also the first operator to be fired. "One day [the solicitor] came in and told me I was fired because ,villiam Hibbard of HibChicago History

75

The Telephone in Chicago

bard, Spencer and Bartlett had said I talked back to him .... Hibbard added that the telephone was a nuisance and anyway, he would have it taken out if I wasn't discharged." The boy was resourceful. He went over to Hibbard, Spencer and Bartlett, applied [or a job and was hired by l\Ir. Hibbard "because 1 seemed to be a nice boy."

But boy operators did not last long. In September the first woman " ¡as hired by the Bell Company, Isabel l\Iaunsell. She started as a disconnect operator and within four years became chief operator.

Also in September 1878, the city council finally granted the Chicago Telephone Exchange its franchise. The company was given blanket permission to use the city streets to set poles and string overhead wires save only that the work had to be done under the supervision of the Department of Public Vlorks. For its part, the company agreed to provide free telephones in four municipal offices.

Historian Bessie Louise Pierce noted: The council was

to

regret its lack of foresight ....

[In 1881] the city became embroiled in a bitter dispute to force the wires underground .... Eventually in 1885, the municipality reached a compromise by which the company promised to place its wires underground, and the city accepted a delay in the accomplishment of the project.

Crude the exchange service was in 1878 and rough the equipment, but it offered something to the public that was earnestly wanted-quick, easy, and direct communication at affordable prices. Like other innovations, the telephone grew faster in Chicago than anywhere else in the country. The city rapidly became a hub of experimentation and development. There was no standardization. Exchange managers made it up as they went along.

As early as October 1878 Eldred recognized that the switching board at 125 LaSalle was hopelessly inadequate to the demands being put upon it. He ordered another one from Boston 76

Chicago History

and hoped. " ' hen a new form of board-one that he had never seen before-arrived, he installed it in one crash weekend. Many years later Eldred recounted how he did it.

In order to disconnect the wires from the old switchboard and transfer them to the new one, all the wires ... had to be rerun .... Notice was given LO the subscribers that from a certain hour on Saturday we should be unable to give them any 5ervice until the following l\Ionclay morning . .. . I selected l 5 or 20 of the best employees we had and notified them that we should require their continuous work from Saturday morning until l\fonclay morning without any rest; that I would furnish them with the necessary refreshments in the exchange room, but none o( them would be permitted to leave unless they were sick, and a certain amount of extra pay would be allotted to them for the successful connection and working of this new switchboard on the following l\Jonc!ay morning. On Saturday we cut off all the wires from the old switchboard and immediately commenced running the new ones from the cupola o( the building clown to the switchboard on the floor below.

The space between the roo[ and the ceiling o[ the exchange being only two and a half feet, the men were required to lie on their backs and by the light of candles pull the wires through cleats down to the switchboard. Sometime during Sunday . . . the insulation of the wire took fire from a candle which was overturned and a large portion of the work was destroyed and had LO be done over again.

On i\fonday morning about 7 o'clock we had all the wires connected, and out of the 15 or 20 employees ... there were only two that were able to keep awake under the strain they had passed through .. . the rest of them being so worn out that they were asleep on the bare floor of the exchange, completely exhausted. [Deposition of Horace H. Eldred, U.S. Circuit Court]

The new switchboard went into operation on January 3, 1879. By June the company was able to issue a directory informing customers that it now had six branch exchanges scattered throughout the city to serve them. It listed more than l,000 subscr ibers out of the city's population of 491,516.

The Telephone in Chicago

CHICAGO TELEPHONIC EXCHANGE, LICENSED UNDER ALEX. GRAHAM BELL PATENTS, 12

5 La Sal le Street,

OVll 15,000 IN l1SI .

NOT ICE TO ;;uBSCRI BERS.

11·c lur;_-r scrurtd t/1e top _floors

ef building

/,a Salle Strcd,.fur 011r Ce,Jtral Oj/iff.

Roum C, <!l )Vo .

Nos.

123

and

125

Business OJ!icc,Jirst jloor

125.

'

11 c arc l11uldi11g our :,·irrs and ru,mrrt,·11,!; stations with Central Ojfirc al thr rate <!f :-/,· dmly. Our linemell -;,i,•1ll call on yo11 in a .fez,· days lo ~cl lomt1i111 (! / y ()11 r /11.-ln1111mt. llcr.:/11p, 110:v 267 subsrribrrs. r111/Jrar·/11,!.!, all !t'11cs <!/ trade.,, .1:e lun.·e /nsured, bryond question, s11crcs., ,four r11!crprt'se in t/11~, o/y.

I

011r Oj/iff :.·/II

u, upo1.fur

lm.,inl's~, lJ'cdncsday, 7u11c 26, and

:~·tll.furn/sh Jli ·ssrn.1.~0-s promptly kl' orderin,g throu_£tlz Telephone. lie art co11rludi11,!.!, arrangements to.furnish Liz-crpool, Lolldon and

\Tc:,· Yuri.: llfur/..·ct Reports to our subscribers. iVe woufrt raut1u11 our subscribers against misrepresentations

ef

o/l1cr parties,and state our Company hold the 011/ypatcnts under u:lu'ch Tclrp!umcs mn be mam!faclurcd and used. Suits will be commenced <~!.!,nt'n.,t parties using any speakl'ng Teleplwne other than the Bell Telephone, as i,ifr/ngers 011 the Bell patents, and injunctions obtained /11 oiforce the rights

o.f t/1e patculees.

H. H. ELDRED, lln'l !aft\

r. 1111 ,.,_. Ct.

Th is notice w as sent to subscribers to the Ch icago Telephonic Exchange to announce its open ing on June 26, 1878. Illinois Bel l.

Chicago History

77

The Telephone in Chicago

Alexander Graham Bell initiates the New York-Ch icago te lephone line in 1892 by calling Angus S. Hibbard, a telephone company executive , in Chicago .

Illinois Bell.

78

Chicago History

Company wagons like this one, photographed in 1901, transported telephone company representatives to the districts in which they solicited subscribers.

Illinois Bell.

On December 21, 1878 the Bell Telephone Company of Illinois was incorporated. Gardiner Hubbard, who had introduced the telephone to Chicago, became its first president. Over the next few years the ownership, officers, organization, and name of the company changed with bewildering frequency, for this was a period when control over the financial management or sale of corporations was non-existent. They were traded like horses. Nevertheless, the essential thread of equipment and service from the Chicago Telephonic Exchange in J 878 to Illinois Bell at present has never been broken.

The approaching settlement between Western Union and National Bell did nothing early in 1879 Lo stop the struggle between their two exchanges in Chicago, but it did take some of the wind out of A.D.T.'s sails. As a result, Bell swept ahead. Anson Stager was not about to accept this lightly, so he hired Horace Eldred away from Bell and made him general manager of all \\'estern Union's nationwide telephone efforts.

Late in 1879, the telegraph and telephone companies reached their agreement in Boston, but the American District Telegraph Company continued to compete with Bell in Chicago as a separate entity until 1881. In that year there

was a merger in the public interest. "Competition between (the two companies) was exceedingly keen, and the subscribers to the two lines suffered an inconvenience which the consolidation eliminated," wrote Bessie Louise Pierce.

The new organizat ion was called the Chicago Telephone Company. Its first president was the tireless General Anson Stager.

The formation of the single company allowed the combined staff to concentrate its energies on getting new subscribers and making technical improvements rather than wasting resources on rough competition with each other. \'\That was first derisively called Bell's "electrical toy" proved to be extremely popular. Chicago people needed little encouragement to use it. By 1882 there were 2,610 in use within the city limits; by 1890 there were 6,518. The figures really jumped then reaching 26,661 by 1900, 575,810 by 1920, and cross ing the one million mark in I 940. This had doubled by 1963.

Exchanges spread throughout the rest of Illinois quickly. The field "¡as wide open to anyone with capital and ambition. Bell and \Vestern Union subsid iaries started many of the early offices but by no means all. The Bloomington exchange opened in June 1879, the Danville Chicago History

79

The Telephone in Chicago

and Decatur exchanges in October. Joliet started its exchange in March 1880, and Freeport in April. In 1881 Champaign opened in July and Canton in December. Aurora followed in early 1882 and Evanston later that year, and so on into the twentieth century. In 1882 there were only 392 telephones in Illinois outside of Chicago. By the late 1960s there were more telephones in Illinois outside of Chicago than in it.

There were occasional setbacks. A representative of the Bell Company demonstrated telephones in and around Kankakee during October 1880. By November 9 he had obtained only 23 subscribers-2 short of the 25 needed to start an exchange. So he left town. The exchange in Kankakee was finally opened in June 1881.

From the beginning, nature and / or man's carelessness contrived to make exchange life a succession of crises. The Gold and Stock Telegraph Company, a Western Union subsidiary, opened the first exchange in Springfield in September 1879. Bell interests quickly took over in November. On the night of November 12, customers and staff alike were treated to the kind of emergency that became a regular feature of telephone life. The local paper, the State Register, reported the next day: There was a confusion of telephonic voices in the city last night. A derrick [ell across the wires and mixed them, resulting in the right calls for the wrong person . . . . The boy at the central office was driven to the verge of insanity. He couldn't get the wires untangled, and finally he fled the office in despair. His hair turned white in a single night.

The claim in the last sentence may not be absolutely plausible, but it makes its point.

The telephone exchanges which spread out to blanket the state were by no means exclusively owned and operated by Bell companies. There have always been independent companies in Illinois providing service in their own franchised territories. True, there has been a steady trend 80

Ch icago History

toward consolidation; but, as the number of independent companies has diminished , the number of telephones they control has increased sharply. In 1940 there ¡were still 415 independent telephone companies in Illinois serving 323,205 telephones. By 1950 those figures were 360 companies and 502,918 telephones; by 1960 there were 198 companies and 708,376 telephones; and by 1970 there were 68 of the former and 1,121 ,183 of the latter. At present the companies range from General Telephone Company in Bloomington with 825,000 telephones to the Adams Telephone Cooperative in Golden with 6,000, and the Alhambra-Grantfork Company of Alhambra with about 1,000 telephones.

At the close of 1976 the businesses and homes of Illinois had 8,994,110 telephones- 7,448,692 Illinois Bell and 1,545,418 independent. The state population was 11,191,000, giving a density of slightly more than 80 telephones per 100 people. On an average day approximately forty million calls were made in the state. So much for statistics!

As popular and intriguing as it may have been in the early days, the flooding of the telephone across the plains of Illinois was due in great part to technical advances that made the use of the telephone convenient and cheap.

Switchboards made it possible for two subscribers who were not on the same line to talk together. Starting out as manually operated "switching" boards, they eventually became automated electronic installations capable of an enormous variety of functions.

Loading coils boosted the distance it was possible to transmit a voice along a wire. In their various forms and refinements they made long distance transmission possible, up to and including the use of underseas cable and microwave.

The dial made it possible to complete a call without the intercession of an operator. Originally called "automatic telephone exchange," the first dial in Illinois was used at Fort Sheridan in 1892. Without such an automatic device

The Telephone in Chicago

(now expanded LO include push huLLons and various auLomaLic dialing devices), iL would noL be possible to assemb le enough operaLors to hand le manually the volume of calls made each clay or LO construct buildings large enough to house Lhe equipmenL they would require. This invenLion by Almon B. SLrowger was manufactured in Chicago by Lhc Automatic Electric Company, and the firsL system was inLroduced in La Porte, Indiana, in 1892. The rnmpany thaL installed the auLornatic sysLem in Chicago was Lhe Il linois Telephone and Telegraph Company, which operated from 1903 to 19 17, when the Bell system wok it over.

The transistor made miniaturi,ation possible and vastly increased the speed at which telephonic equipment could operate. BoLh are pivoLal for handling the mass volume Lhat made Lelephone talk what Marshall McLuhan Lermed "an absoluLe right."

All of these Lechnical improvements had imponanL effects on the financia l aspecls o( Lelephoning and were es,entially responsible for the fact Lhal Lhe long distance call from Chicago to New York which osL .$9 in 1892, when the service was initiated, now co,ts less Lhan 50¢.

The prolifernLion of patenLs, statistics, and corporaLe financia l reports tells on ly the impersonal side of Lhe story. For mote than the first half-century of iLs life, the telephone was primarily a humanisticd vice boLh for the people who worked for the company and for its customers. There are nume10us documents from the old days Lhat convey some of the special flavor thaL working for a telephone company musL have had. William Hoye!, who starLed with the company in 1881 as a night operator and relired as lreasurer in 1930, described his first job lhis way: After 9 PM it was our job to clean out the office, clean and fill the lamps with kerosene, fill the stove with coal ... blow the dust out 0£ the switchboard with a bellows .... After all our chores were done, we would connect up with a few nearby towns.

They would furnish singing or music on an organ.

(T/11• Old Oaken lluckct was the favorite .) We had our own quartet: the manager, myself, the janitor of the building and his friend.

The i nstrucl ions for personal conduct issued in I 911 Lo troublemen- 11ow called installation / repair technicians-included such exhonation ·

as: J>ut up a "good front." It is not necessary to ad vertise any tailor shop, neither is it necessary to go about your work looking like a coal heaver. Overalls can look as respectable as anything else, but they must at least show that they arc on speaking terms with the laundryman.

If requested to go around to the hack door, don't consider yourself insulted, but try Lo realize that the lady of the holl5e may not have a maid and is on ly trying to save work for herself.

H you ever believe that a subscriber is a crank, forget it. All of them arc wise enough to tell when a telephone is not working right. ot every troub leman can do this.

Treat everybody as you like to be treated, not forgetting your horse. If you want to know the horse's side of it, ju5t take off your coat and hat some zero day, hitch yourscl( to the post with your belt, and stand there a bout two hours.

Don't go pcllmcJI through the streets regardless of pedestrians as though you were going a(tcr your salary check.

1f you don't like your job, resign.

Thal wa · hard-bitten candor for the working man. For Lhe working girl, all was sweetne sand light. Tiu· Beauty of Service, a 1918 recruitment booklet, re ounts in raLher purple prose the tale of Joy Miller who comes to Chicago to he lp earn enough money to care for her ai ling Mother.

After several disheartening experiences in looking for suiLable work, Joy sees an advertisement for telephone operators: "Life, death, personal happiness, business, the fate of nations-all rest with the Girl at the Board. She never fails."

Joy resolves to apply. This "was not merely an advertisement to her; it was a call from Mother." The rest of the story deals with virtu e r ewarded. Joy gets the job . .. loves her work . . . saves a life by telephone .. . is reu nited wi th h er Ch icago History

81

The Telephone in Chicago

~- ----·TJ-; 1.EPHONES. --~----

TELEPHONES!

THE ONLY TWO GRAND PRIZES AT THE PARIS EXPOSITION,

EDISON, GRAY, CHICAGO,

NEW YORK,

The GPld and Stock Tele[raph Co., A1 tbe Exclusive .&&ent of the

Ameriean Speaking Telephone Co., JS T tl K

:IILE MANUFAC'rURER OF TELEPHONES Made under tbe oaten ta of Thoe. A. F..dl1on, Me nlo P arl<. and Kll1ba Gray, Chicago, to whom ha ve bceu awarded for Teleohonea the Oul y Grand Pri zes ( ft rat prizes) ai the Par!, l<.xpoaltlon, t or •; 1ec t 1lcaJ Jn veotlons, aod

upon whom hu been conferred th Pr eto r hy the l"renc h Government t he Crou or the Led on of Honor.

10 1 atd~~t fouow!otoffice• and 1tat1o a1 of the Am e rlcan"b11trlct

~~~l':i'~f1~~tl a'::~ ~.: n,/~if.h'~~iri r1e5 lefl:Cub~:~~&nJ:r,?e~0ey~:~e~~~~t. 1ci>~~:-1!l~-~tn: tY•kOOnd -at. and Centre-a v-. : :lt,7 ,veat M&dlllon- lt. :

1193 West Madi.Ion-ct. : :M6 Chi cago -a v.: Ci t y -Hall and Co urt•Houac, Adams-ot. Al.lo at t he o mcea of t be Weatern Union 'l'eleJtr&pb Comoany. t h e Atla ntic & I

~!~ci~~l.b

t'ri~ma~::r• a!~•S~a;iT~fe~r:gg

panr. tbe ~blcaa-o Fire-Alarm Televa1>b. tbe Me tro~~'t.:'rfu~~,!°~pba~.m p:~·

OeJlt butlue• olllcer In C:blC&l(O.

THE fOLD .lND STOCK. TELEGJl.lPH CO. NORVTN GREEN, President.

GEORGE WALKER, Vlce•Pre1ldent. &. G. LYNCH. General Aorent.

1'1ew York.

Room 9 Union. Bu1Jdln11, Cb.lcqo,

THE AMERICAN DISTRICT TELEGRAPH CO., ORGANIZED IN CIDCAGO 1872.

DLREC'l'ORS :

.lNSON STAGER, JORN B. DR.ill, liOB•il lHLLUKS, LEROY B. FIR•.11t, E. BBUCE CH.ll'IDLER,

GENERAL OFFICE, 118 U S!LLE-ST. ' JN ADDITION TO 'l'HE REGULAR

IESSENGER, BURGLAR-AU RM, A.ND WATCH SERVICE

OF TATS COMPANY. It ha• 1n Active operation a Telephone Exc hange, connecttn,: by d.t rect. wires w lthtn the clty all of tts 1uba1cr lbera. ao d f urnis hi ng t h em wi th t.he un ri valed a nd u nequaled Telephone• or Edtao n & Gray. T bls Com pan y exten ds f tB w1re11 to r eatdences. u 1'teH a.a to busloeM-offlcr!l. Ap plicat,lons f or lnatrum cnta u n be m alde a t . the Gr nerai Office of the

f~~J~;_ r, 118 L~~eB~LF1Y~r•t~~n{l:!e~~T

_1n

J . JEF"FERY, Su perinte ndent.

Advert isements such as this in the Chicago Daily Tribune of November 1, 1878 contributed t o a patent infringement suit by Bell against Western Union (of which the American District Telegraph Company was a subs idiary) . The su it was settled out of court in favor of Bell in 1879. CHS.

82

Chicago History

Mother. "It was the Chicago Telephone Company that did it all!" she cries in triumph.

Heady stuff, no doubt. But it helped produce the kind of operators who, as "Cen tral," helped knit communities together for generations. In the popular mind, "Central" was telephone service.

For the public the telephone qu ickly became more than just a device to make running a business easier. In a decade or two, use of the telephone took on very special social overtones.

A 1903 report indicated : Ingen ious householders have found in n umerable other uses for the telephone never originally thought of. The operator many times gets the request, "Please ring my bell at 6 o'clock tomorrow morning" ; 5,000 times every day in Chicago she is asked the time of day; election and prizefight results, football and baseball scores are asked for and reported.

J\Iany attempts have been made to allow telephone patrons to listen to operas, concerts and church services, but without any permanent success. I have heard of people taking French and German lessons over the telephone.

There was social prestige in it. If you had a telephone and a victrola, it was fashionable to tie up the lines for hours entertaining your friends with records by Caruso, Tetrazzini, .Journet, or the .John Philip Sousa Band. A telephone also brought a certain tone o( respectability to any establishment. The I 905 book carried a listing for Ada Everle igh (South 412), but one can only speculate about its uses.

Songs about the telephone were very popular.

H ello! Ma Baby; Drop a Nickel, Please; H ello Central, Give Me H eaven ; Call M e Up Some Rainy Afternoon, and the real winner, All Alone by the T elephone were sung everywhere.

There was a special kind of joshing telephone h umor that made i t feasible in 1903 for the Illinois Telephone and Telegraph Company to advertise its new dial as "the cussless, wa itless, ou t-of-order-less, Girl-less telephone."

Not all uses of the telephone were acceptable.

The Telephone in Chicago

Operators at the toll call switchboard in the main Bell office In Chicago, 1902. The women standing by the wall are supervisors. Illinois Bell.

There were quick legal restri( lions on the use of the telephone for "the dissemination o( racetrack information"- in a word, on bookies. The battle against them started early and hasn't ended. In a sample period, from l 939 to l 950, Illinois Bell took out more than 13,500 illegal bookie lines in Chicago.

Since the early 1960s, many companies have used the telephone as a tool for mass sales solicitation. This was not practical until dials were widely available (Chicago was not "all-dial" until 1960), but once they were, the practice spread

quickly. While some customers now regard telephone sales solicitation as a n invasion of pr ivacy, the sales rationale seems to be that we can easily throw out junk mail unopened, but there are few people who can resist answering a ringing telephone.

In recent years telephone lines have been used to put forth all sorts of messages. In Chicago one can, or recently could, dial a prayer, a joke, a nature story, a tip on losing weight, a h int on kicking the smokers' habit. In December 1977 almost 8½ million calls were made to Santa Chi cago History

83

The Telephone in Chicago

Claus. Obviously such messages fill a public craving.

Telephone lines have also been used to transmit the propaganda of racist and anti-semitic groups. Many of these hate-filled messages have stirred up great public protest and have been debated in the courts. The consistent ruling has been that the law gives equal access to telephone service for all-the sound and the sordid.

In times of national joy or crisis people turn to the telephone for confirmation and comfort.

On the night of November 11, 1918, bedlam broke out all over Chicago when news of the armistice swept through the city. In one hour, more than 370,000 calls were made by people anxious to share the news. A night operator in i;,Voodstock recalled that she first heard the news from a lineman in Chicago. "Shortly after, a long distance call came in for the superintendent of the town factory. Then the plant's whistlenormally used for fire alerts-began to sound.

The board lit up like a Christmas tree with almost everybody in town calling to find out where the fire was. She remembered that "We answered the calls with: 'The war is oYer. Number, please?' " The attack on Pearl Harbor caught everyone unprepared. A usually quiet December Sunday in the central offices was turned into a frantic rounding up of operators to handle the avalanche of calls. Long distance was especially busy. Some 42,000 calls were placed in a very short time causing long delays for some circuits.

In contrast, at about 11 :30 AM on December 8, 1941 all telephone traffic virtually ceased as President Roosevelt went on the air to assure Americans that "with the confidence in our armed forces, with the unbounding determination of our people, we will gain the inevitable triumph."

But that was only one instance of volume calling. That memorable early fall night in 1959 when the \Vhite Sox clinched the pennant, every civil defense siren in the city screamed out in celebration. Within moments, central offices all 84

Chi cago Hist ory

over the city were overwhelmed by callers trying to find out from each other and the operators if Chicago were under attack.

The entire telephone system was jammed again just after noon on November 22, 1963, when the country was stunned by the assassination of President Kennedy. In the hour between 12:30 and 1:30, more than 90 percent of all local callers in Chicago had to wait for a dial tone.

The biggest calling day in the city's history, however, was January 26, 1967-the day Chicago was buried under two feet o[ snow. But Chicagoans were only technically snowbound.

They stayed at home and made 16.7 million telephone calls.

Anthropologist Margaret lead has expressed the view that: It is not too much to say that the telephone makes modern society possible, that no substitution for it would suffice, but that all the applications [of the telephone] arc all necessary in a world in which people need lO be both far apart and very close.

There is no way of knowing how much, if any, of this idea may have been in Alexander Graham Bell's mind when he invented the telephone or in Gardiner Greene Hubbard's when he brought it to Chicago. But, at present, it \\'Ould be virtually impossible to disengage from our day-to-day liYes the telephone and the innumerable services based on its worldwide switching network that we use without thought.

The growth of that network was an effective factor in the growth of American business, both the multiplant, multinational corporation and the smaller or isolated company. Instant voiceto-voice communication wiped out the problems that distance and time had always posed for business. In a similar way, our densely packed, vertical cities are practical only because of the elevator (which makes internal movement feasible) and the telephone. The ubiquity of the telephone plays almost as important a role in modern mobility as does the airplane. People

The Telephone in Chicago

Shopping by 'relephone is a Most Convenient Way

"Private Exchanrte-One" i\lAR,HAI.L F1fL1) BK.\ ... l,H LINE•,

f5

C°OMP,r-.Y 's TtLF.PHO:<iF. Swrr C.HBOAI.O, nu: L..\RGF~T l'Rl\,\Tf TflfPHO"l,'l ·v,n,1 1, TH• WOKIU,

RtQU Ja.ES fOUa.TEFN UAY OPERAT ORS TO ).IAKF. CO:>.N[C:TI0'\1,

-\ RR.\~l H I.If\£

,n ,s

IO nrRY

(), R z,

1-l. l lOS 01-· l HL

I f1RF.

There is a growing satisfaction in shopping by telephone with us. Every effort is being made to make it so. Every order, inquiry, or request will be quickly and intelligently cared for. Every section of this store is at your service.

CaJJ for " Private Exchan ge-One." and then ask the operato r for the section you wish to speak with. If in d oub t, explain briefly to the operator, who will give proper co n nection . For directory of section s, see paste 9 0 .

Marshall Field & Con1pany State . Wa shington, Randol ph and Wabash Ave.

Th is advertisement promoting the pleasures of shopping by telephone ap peared in the Comple te Telephone Directory of Chicago & Vicinity published in January 1904. CHS.

Chicago History

85

The Telephone in Chicago

are willing to move from city to city because distance is now measured in the cost of a long distance call or the length of a jet flight rather than in miles.

Bell's simple black box contained seeds that have grown into an immense variety of services all transmitted over the telecommunications network. Television and radio broadcasts of major newsbreaks, of sporting events, presidential elections and inaugurations, wars and civil disturbances, our favorite entertainment, and the Academy Awards-all go via the network.

The stock quotations in brokers' offices, the wire photos printed in newspapers, the remote alarm and security systems that watch over closed or distant homes, offices, banks, museums, and factories, the computer in one place that feeds or gathers information from another computer across the city, state, or country, the credit and identity checks made in stores and banks, the medical data sent from patients remote from a hospital or doctor's office-all travel over the network. An electronic blackboard is just around the corner. A little further along in the future, the network will help a person away from home turn off the lawn sprinkler, turn on the oven, and put out the cat. These and other services are all grandchildren of that first "Mr. ¡w atson, come here, I want you!" They make possible, in Daniel Boorstin's phrase, that "mass-production of the moment" that is probably the most characteristic feature of contemporary society. Bell invented it. Clever men

86

Chicago History

promoted it. As one social commentator has observed: our lives [are] shaped by this innocent and unobtrusive invention , which began as a toy, acquired status as a luxury, became a comfort, and is now such a necessity that welfare families can have their telephones paid for by the state. We shaped it to us, and now it shapes our lives in ways to which we give no thought. [Ithiel de Sola Pool in The Social Impact of the T elephone.]

Selected Sources Illinois Bell Historica l Collection. ADVERTISEMENTS: May 1877, May 1878, June 24, 1878, in Illinois Telephone and Telegraph Company Directory , 1903. LETTERS: from Gardiner Hubbard, September 1877 (?); from Horace H. Eldred, April 19, 1878; from A. 0. Morgan lo Thomas Sanders, Jun e 2. 1878; from George H . Rell. Augusl 27, 1940. 1>1TF.R¡ \IEW: taped, with Dorothy Teeple Suhr, November 23, 1976.

DEPOSITIONS: Charles H . Summers, U.S. Patent Office, Firman vs Shaw, Chicago, 1880; Horace H. Eldred, U.S. Circuit Court, Western Electric Co. vs Citize ns Telephone Co., C hicago, May 31, 1898. PUBLICATIONS: Rules for Troublemen, 191 I ; The Beauty of Seroice, ca. 19 18 ; Pioneer RnniniscenCt!S,

by William J . Boyd, ca. 1930.

Bocui ngcr, H . 111. The Telephone Book. Croton-on-Hudson: Riverwood Publishers Ltd., 1977.

Brooks, John , Telephone. New York: Harper & Row , 1976.

Kingsbury, J. E. The Telephone a11d Telephone Excha11ges.

London: J.ongman"i, Green and Co., 19 15.

Larned. S. J. "Telephone Service." Western Electric, March 20, 1903. :llackenzie, Catherine. Alexander Graham Bell. Boston & New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1915. :llead , Margaret. "Looking at the Telephone a Lillie Differently." Bell Telephone Magazine, January-February, 1976 .

Pierce, Bessie Louise. A History of Chicago. III. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1957.

Pool, lthiel de Sola, ed . The Social Impa ct of the Telef,hone.

Cambridge: The M.l.T. Press , 1977.

Walson, Thomas. Exploring Life. New York : Appleton and Company, 1926.

Catholic Education in Chicago: The Formative Years 1840-1890

BY TIMOTHY WALCH

Idjacation is something that a man has to fight f)r an) pull out iv its hole be th) hair iv its head.

That's th) reason it)s so precious." a

Father Kelly as quoted by Mr. Dooley

THIS OBSERVATION MADE Catholic leaders in Chicago laugh, for they knew that the Philosopher of Archey Road and his pastor were right. The establishment of parochial education in Chicago during the nineteenth century had been a struggle. Handicapped by lack of funds, disagreements over objectives, and conflict with Chicago's non-Catholic community, Catholic churchmen had built a school system out of liule more than faith, hope, and charity. Theirs was truly a remarkable achievement, for by the turn of the century Chicago had the largest Catholic school system in the United States.

Between 1840 and 1890, large numbers of Catholic immigrants flocked to Chicago from Ireland, Germany, and later from southern and eastern Europe, bringing with them their hopes and dreams but precious little else. Unskilled for the most part, they took jobs which earned them barely enough for food, clothing, and shelter. There was scarcely money for the construction of churches, let alone schools. Church leaders prayed and pleaded with the laity and mission societies in Europe for fund to build schools, but to Ii ttle avail. and throughout the nineteenth century parish pastors were left to provide for schooling as best they could. Al-

Timothy Walch is Director of Special Programs for the Society of American Archivists. This article stems from a broader study comparing Catholic education in Chicago and l\filwaukee in the nineteenth century.

though Catholics constituted one-third of Chicago's population in the 1840s, they established only four schools during that decade.

Most of the early Catholic schools in Chicago were located in church basements or converted church buildings. The first parish school was started in St. Mary's Church, Wabash at Madison, in 1846. A second school was started by Germans in St. Joseph's parish that same year.

The parishioners of St. Mary's built a second school in 1848, this one ror girls. Yet another school was built that year by the German parish of St. Peters. Each of these schools struggled to survive in the face of poverty.

The increasing number of immigrant Catholics arriving in Chicago in the 1850s led to the establishment of additional parishes and schools.

The Irish of St. Patrick's parish built a school for boys in J850 and a school for girls in 1854; both were located on Desplaines near Adams.

The French built a school of their own at Polk and Sherman in 1853 and the Germans built schools in St. Michael's parish on the North Side and in St. Francis' parish on the West Side in 1854. In all, Catholics in Chicago built eight new parish schools in the 1850s, but it was not enough. Many Catholic children still attended public schools and this worried parochial schoolmen.

Beginning in the 1850s and for many years thereafter, the Catholic press bemoaned the state of parochial schooling and castigated Catholic parents for allowing their children to grow u p in ignorance. The Western Tablet of April 3, 1852 warned that continued indifference to th is problem would render Catholic children "a Ch icago History

87

St. Mary's, erected in 1833 as the first Catholic church in the city, became Chicago's first parish school after the congregation built a new brick church on Wabash and Madison. CHS.

nuisance to society, a disgrace to their religion, and a curse to their own careless and guilty parents." Even worse than lax parents were those who sent their children to public schools. Cathol ic newspapers went to extraordinary lengths to stress the dangers of public education, referring to common schools as "nurseries of heathenism, vice, and crime." Catholic parents who allowed their children to enroll were accused of committing "spiritual murder" and of violating the responsibilities of their faith. One author stated that even illiteracy was preferable to public schooling.

One reason that public schooling disturbed Church leaders was that the curriculum included religious instruction, more specifically, Protestant religious instruction. Obviously Catholic parents and clergy feared that sectarian instruction at such an impressionable age would undermine the religious faith of Catholic children, and this posed a threat to the very life of the Church in Chicago. So strong were such fears that Catholic leaders felt that a portion of state school funds should be set aside for the construction of paroch ial schools and made plans for an appeal to the legislature.

88

Chi cago History

The logic of the appeal was based on the premise that as taxpayers, Catholics had a right to share in the benefits of the school fund but could not, as a matter of conscience, send their children to public schools. The Catholic solution to this dilemma was to petition for a separate, state supported Catholic school system.

Since a petition to the state legislature for such a grant would look foolish as long as Catholic children attended public schools, the Catholic press tried to shame parents into presenting a united front. "\Vhoever sends his children to public schools," exclaimed one editorial in 1853, "weakens our cause by lending help to the enemies of Catholicity. When our opponents see that we will not patronize their schools, they will then yield us our rights in this regard."

This campaign reached a climax in 1855 when the Illinois General Assembly considered a bill which would provide state support for all public schools. The new law would levy a property tax on all state residents and return the funds to the public school districts. Private schools would be excluded from receiving aid unless they subm itted to the control of district officials. Even though few private schools in

Catholic Education

Attorney James A. Mulligan (1830-1864). editor of the Western Tablet and early advocate of public support for parochial schools. A Civil War hero, he led the Irish brigade. CHS.

Chicago had ever received state aid, the new law negated the possibility of it ever happening.

Indeed, the new law undercut the Catholic position completely.

In what was one o( their first significant efforts at political organization, Chicago Catholics lobbied against the bill under the leadership of James A. Mulligan, a prominent Catholic attorney. Perhaps the Catholic strategy is best reflected in a letter that l\1 ulligan sent to a colleague on .January 11 , 1855. "Examine your state constitution," advised :M ulligan, "and see if there be a provision such as this: 'no human authority can in any case whatever control or interfere with the rights o( conscience.' Now i( we can make this a matter of conscience you cannot inquire whether our conscience be right or not, but must accept it. If this legislature compels us to pay Vs of the school tax for what our consciences will not permit us to enjoy, there is a plain interference and violation of the Constitution." But the Catholic argument proved ineffectual against the forces which saw themselves as protecting the principle of separation of church and state. The bill became law on February 15, 1855.

Nativists anxious to retain their power in the face of competition (rom newly-arrived immigrant groups quickly seized upon Catholic agitation against the school bill and used it as a

weapon in the next municipal election. By this time Chicago's Catholics, many of whom were foreign-born, comprised such a large proportion of the city's population that they could control the election were they to organize behind one candidate. But the nativists organized first.

Throughout February and March of 1855, the Literary Budget, a nativist paper, and the Chicago Tribune hammered away at the theme of a Catholic conspiracy and warned of the clanger to the separation of church and state.

When the election took place on March 8, 1855 the native American forces were victorious and Levi Boone, a Temperance-Nativist candidate, became the new mayor. Victory encouraged the Tribune to continue its attacks on Catholicism into April, this time assailing the theological views of the "Papists." These continued anti-Catholic diatribes, coupled with Mayor Boone's attempts to close down the beer halls and saloons on the Sabbath, outraged the Catholic immigrant population. Late in April fighting broke out between the police and a crowd of Germans outside the courthouse over the trial of a German saloonkeeper prosecuted for selling beer on Sunday. The situation became so tense that martial law was declared and maintained for three clays.

The Tribune was not penitential about its role in the disturbance, but for a time its criticism of Catholicism abated. "We have no war to wage with Catholics," the editors wrote. "Our hostility is confined to the political aspect that Catholicism now and then puts on to the injury of what all Americans should prize the most."

The violence and bitterness of late April persuaded both Catholics and non-Catholics of the need to search for new ways of compromise.

The following March Mayor Boone and the nativists were voted out of office.

Nevertheless, resentment toward the Catholics for their opposition to the school bill li ngered on for some time. This fact, coupled with the indifference and poverty of many Catholic parents, made the 1850s a decade of discontent for Chicago Histo ry

89

Catholic Education

:G. ti }L ¡i

ill r\ M 1: ÂŁ Y E !.fti V 'J L !!

CH LC ,\ ' ;(),

11 L.

Holy Family School, built in 1865, survived the Chicago Fire and became a model for other Catholic schools throughout the city. CHS.

the Church in Chicago. The predominantly Irish clergy and lay leadership were particularly disturbed by the foregoing events. For them the spread of public education must have been all too reminiscent of the efforts of the English in Ireland to entice Catholic children into state supported Protestant schools in the early nineteenth century. Yet the Catholic leaders persevered in the struggle to redress their grievances. Instead of turning inward and forming a protective ghetto, the bishops, clergy, and lay leadership resorted to the press, the ballot, and the petition to fight for a parochial school system. Even though early attempts failed, the Church leadership did not give up.

Its fortitude was undoubtedly bolstered by 90

Chicago History

the success of the Jesuits in one particular Chicago parish. When the Jesuits came to Chicago in 1857 and founded the Holy Family parish on the city's West Side, they initiated one of the most extraordinary educational enterprises the city would ever see. The key to their success was the Reverend Arnold Darnen, who proved to be a dynamic orator, a forceful administrator, and-most important of all-an effecti e fundraiser. By 1877 Damen's parish had grown beyond all known proportions. Available enrollment figures indicate that just three of its five schools were educating fully twenty-seven percent of all the children enrolled in Catholic schools in Chicago.

Darnen labored under the same handicaps as

other parish pastors in the city. He initially collected money for his schools by going door to door in the neighborhoods adjacent to his parish. The response was mixed. A parishioner who joined Darnen on one such excursion related the story of a wealthy businessman who would not give money for the support of "frogs and wild clucks," a reference to the marshes which made up a substantial part of the parish. After repeated cajoling he gave Darnen a dollar. "I shook my head at the Father not to take the amount," wrote the parishioner, "but he did and respectfully thanked the giver. 'Oh, Father!' I said when we reached the sidewalk, 'why did you take that paltry dollar?' 'My good friend,' said Darnen, 'every little helps.' " Darnen aggressively sought money from his provincial superiors in St. Louis as well. "Please send me the remainder of the money from the festival," he wrote in June 1858, "for I have a great many payments." The following month he asked his superiors "to act cleverly for Chicago" and send him six thousand dollars in payment for a certain estate. He promised that he would never ask for money again: but he did not keep his word. Darnen continued to seek funds from the province as well as from other sources.

Darnen took an active interest in the selection of the teaching staff for his schools. Although he was blessed with several Jesuits to teach the boys and the Ladies of the Sacred Heart to teach the girls, he needed lay teachers to fill positions in his rapidly growing school system. In June 1858 he informed his superiors that he had just opened his free schools and had already enrolled 300 children. To handle the influx he hired three sisters, Mary, Sarah, and Margaret Ghent, "to conduct choir, play the organ, and teach school for females." He also engaged one Mr. Seaman to assist the Jesuits. "The boys' school costs us nothing," he wrote later to his superiors; "except for the board of Mr. Seaman; he does remarkably well, keeps excellent order, and i sacristan; he is willing and humble; what he gets from the school goes toward the pay-

Rev. f.DfM6fi 3.J. Father Arnold Darnen (1815-1890), the "Catholic Hercules" whose fundraising ability helped build a school system out of little more than faith, hope, and charity. CHS, gift of Marie Friedline.

ment of his debts." From these small beginnings grew Holy Family School located at Morgan and 12th Street, which educated over 1500 students each year from 1865 to 1880.

During the 1860s the corps of teachers swelled with Damen's single-handed recruitment of the Sisters of Charity of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Darnen promised the nuns that he would provide a furnished house and an annual salary of $250 for each. As Brother Thomas M ulkerins relates in his parish history, Darnen was anxious to consummate the agreement before the beginning of the 1867 school year, explaining to Father John Donaghoe, chaplain of the Sisters of Charity, "If we commence about a month before the public schools ... we will secure all our Catholic children." He instructed Father Donaghoe that "We would like to get nine Sisters, but try to send three or four at once if possible and let them be good teachers, so as to make a good impression, for the first impression is generally the lasting one."

Nine Sisters arrived in August and on the 19th of that month two new schools, St. Aloysius and St. Stanislaus, opened their doors to 650 pupils.

The establishment of other Holy Family schools Chicago History

91

Catholic Education

soon foJlowed, and by 1870 their enrollment neared 5,000, ten times greater than the number of students who attended the public school in the parish.

Small wonder, then, that the reputation of Arnold Darnen and his Holy Family parish soon spread throughout the city. ¡when George Phillips published his book, Chicago and Her Churches, in 1868, Darnen was recognized as a leader of the Church in Chicago and received equal treatment with the bishop, James Duggan.

James J. Sheahan's Chicago Views (1866) hailed Darnen as a "Catholic Hercules."

Damen's school system became the model for other parishes in the city, but few pastors possessed his fundraising abilities and in most instances the operation of parochial schools was a financial struggle. Even though the number of Catholic schools rose to fifteen by the encl of the 1860s, most of them were marginal operations. ,!\Then Catholic leaders heard the news that a constitutional convention would convene in Springfield in December 1869, they renewed their efforts to secure a portion of the state school fund and agitated in the Catholic press throughout the autumn of that year.

The Western Catholic denied that Catholics wanted more than their fair share: rather, they opposed being asked "to support a school system which violates every principle of their faith."

The charges of injustice brought responses from many Chicago newspapers, especially the Tribune and The Advance, a Congregationalist publication. The Tribune argued that the duty of the state was to provide schools which all children could attend without the imposition of any sectarian instruction. The Advance emphasized that the preservation of a common school system was important because it fostered homogeneity among the populace. Many non-Catholics shared these views and had little sympathy for the parochial position.

The convention opened on December 13, 1869 but the issue of state aid to sectarian schools did not arise until February 12 of the following 92

Chi cago History

year. On that clay the convention debated an article prohibiting the distribution of state funds to sectarian schools. The ensuing debate revealed that the majority of the delegates favored such a prohibition, although there were a few dissenting voices. The leader of the opposition, Snowdon S. Hayes of Cook County, reminded delegates that many citizens thought religion and education to be inseparable and that inclusion of such a clause in the constitution would jeopardize its chances at the polls.

Hayes believed that the article would upset the Catholic leaders and encourage their resistance to the entire constitution. But since the majority of the delegates were committed to a complete separation of church and state, Hayes' attempts at compromise were unsuccessful.

Failing a second time to gain a share of the state school fund, diocesan leaders redoubled their efforts to raise money from within the Catholic community. Their prospects for success in 1870 were better than they had been in the past, for they appealed to a new generation of Catholics who were better educated than their parents and in a better position to provide financial backing. These American-born Catholics reali,ed that their children needed a good education to succeed in American society, yet they wanted their children to gro,v up within the church of their ancestors. Parochial schooling represented both a means of preserving the past and of planning for the future.

At the same time, some ethnic groups came to value parish schools as a means of sustaining the language and cultural traditions of their original homeland. The Germans continued their educational efforts by adding schools in 1873 in St. Anthony's parish on the South Side and in 1876 in St. Paul's parish at 22nd Place and Hoyne Avenue. The Polish were not to be outdone and in 1874 built a school in St. Stanislaus Koska parish on the North Side. St. Stan's and its school quickly became the heart of the Polish community in Chicago. Additional Polish Catholic schools were established in 1877

Catholic Education

Even with parental support educational financing continued to be a problem in the 1870s.

Many schools survived because the nuns who served as teachers received no salaries, only room and board. A number of Catholic schools operated on a sliding tuition scale based on the ability of the parents to pay. Fees ranged from fifty cents to a dollar per month depending on the child's course of study, but children from impoverished families could attend gratis. A feature story on Damen's schools in the Chicago Post and Mail of April 20, 1876, described how this system worked:

Children offer food to a needy schoolmate in this lesson on charity from The Young Catholic's Guide (September 1868). Such readers stressed moral virtues. CHS.

in Holy Trinity parish (Northwest Side) and in St. Adelbert's (W'est Side). The Bohemians also established schools in the 1870s, most notably St. Procopius parish on the \,Vest Side in 1876.

Differences among laymen over the objectives and policies that should govern church schools Jed to confusion as each group promoted its own version of parochial education. It is unlikely that the predominantly Irish-American bishops of Chicago were pleased with the use of native languages in the classroom, but they did nothing to stop the custom. In the end these ethnic groups had their way because the Church needed the support of the foreign-speaking parents. The result was a patchwork collection of schools, some serving particular territorial areas and others serving various nationalities. This pattern reflected the organization of the diocese itseH, which consisted of numerous overlapping parishes.

From accurate calculation and long experience, it is estimated, by the managers of these schools, that the extra tuition collected from those who pay over fifty cents a month is equal to the amount which would be due from non-paying pupils, if they were charged at the rate of fifty cents, and as these schools are self-supporting, the estimate based on years of careful observation and practical experiments shows that under the parochial system the Catholics all educate their children at the rate of S5 .50 a year.

But the total amount collected from tuition payments scarcely met all the expenses of operating the schools.

Some parishes like Holy Family organized Sunday School associations as a means of raising money for the parish schools. After dividing the parish into districts, members of the association-usually parents of school children-collected an extra dollar per year per family. In Holy Family parish they also distributed the Sunday School Messenger to keep both parents and children informed of the educational activities of the parish.

Such activities provided some assistance to the parish pastors, who welcomed parental involvement after years of lethargy and neglect. Yet at times it was necessary to prod the laymen and keep them mindful of their duties. In May 1873 the editors of the Western Catholic complained that "the whole burden of the work is for the Chicago History

93

Catholic Education

Students and teachers of St. Patrick's Academy (frame building at right) located north of Adams on Desplaines Street, ca. 1870. The Chicago Catholic.

most part thrown upon the clergy who are frequently left to build the school, procure the scholars, and then maintain the teachers." The paper pleaded "that Catholic parents will henceforth evince a greater interest in this important work; let them use their means, their time, their influence, and do everything they can to aid the clergy in their noble efforts."

By comparison the Western Catholic contains little discussion of what was actually being taught in the classroom. The potpourri of religious teaching orders and ethnic groups produced a Catholic curriculum that varied from parish to parish. Indeed, the differences among the parish schools of different ethnic groups were as great as those between Catholic and public schools. Different orders of nuns with distinctive dress, different languages, and, most of all, distinctive cultures, made for classrooms which were at the same time measures of ethnicity, religion, and conservative social values.

Not all Catholic classrooms were so distinctive. In the 1870s and 1880s, the majority of the students enrolled in Chicago's Catholic schools were from English-speaking parishes. If English language Catholic schoolbooks are any indication of what went on in these classrooms, the 94

Chicago History

import of what was taught in the majority of Catholic schools was similar to the lessons taught in public schools. This is not to say that the two types of education were identical but that Catholic texts and readers emphasized the same virtues-patriotism, piety, deference, thrift, honesty, and diligence-that were at the heart of the lesson books used in the public schools.

Nevertheless, even the English language Catholic schools were in several essentials distinctly different from the public schools: the classes were taught by nuns; the lessons were laced with moral interpretations; and intensive religious study was part of the curriculum.

In 1881 the Tribun e paused to evaluate the progress made in Catholic education during the previous decade . "It may interest the general public," wrote one editor, "to know that the Catholic Church has been making an immense effort to carry out a policy of placing every Catholic child in a Catholic school, and that progress in this direction is greater than generally supposed." Indeed, the growth of the Catholic school system during the 1870s was nothing short of remarkable. Between 1870 and 1880 the number of Catholic schools grew from 15 to 29 and the number of students from 10,612 to

Catholic Education

THE LITTLE The Little Bee , published by the American League of the Cross in Chicago beginning in 1884, promised to provide "wholesome mental food" for Catholic school children. CHS. •· TJ,,. ht:~;,, /,,,,,,. 11,11<>11,,11,,,,,,.,i.,., rl•,. ,:,., /tr, f,- 1,., 1,,.,1,

,.1,,,,, r~• ,,,,.n-111"•~.'

,-:,.,·/, \' I ;

B E E l ,..,

•'II,.

(1

\T H l'.lll'fl Of

f ',•o v R

1111'

.\ ,it

-.1,1 ,

\\It,

r ,rKO~A"F OP

L r. "·'·" n~

Iv,1 un rt\ Y

TH~

llJC ,nr,G.

\\tl/:!11•·\-.

r u t' C"o, ...

FIRST SERIES 1• 1 111 1-.11

.J , "

P.

\I .

• 11

lI , ,

II\

1· "".

~.

C;H:IC AOO.

;OHN J. COLUNS, & CO . PRIMT(RS. 47 &- 49 DEARBORN STRU T 1885

The teaching stall and first student body of St. Vincent's College, predecessor of DePaul University, in 1898. Classes met in a remodeled church on the North Side. CHS, gilt of Marshall Field.

Chicago History

95

St. Stanislaus school children, 1910. By the turn of the century, Chicago's Catholic school system was the largest in the United States. CHS, Chicago Daily News photo, gift of Field Enterprises.

16,713, representing increases of 93 percent and 57 percent respectively. Although it is doubtful that Catholics understood the expansion of parochial education with any statistical precision, they did recognize that such rapid expansion demanded more efficient organization. In January 1884 the Western Catholic began to urge the reform of the parochial school system through the creation of a centralized school board.

The idea was well received. One reader responded: "I think your views as to a centralized board of education most excellent, and the board of education a necessity so as to make our Catholic school system thoroughly effective."

The editors replied that "our objective is to place Catholic schools not only on an equality with public schools, but to elevate them to such a standard of efficiency as will make them objects of envy to our non-Catholic neighbors. Organization in educational matters can accomplish anything." Another reader praised this attitude and noted "the parochial school was the public school of the Church and will answer the needs of the coming Catholic generation."

96

Ch icago History

By the end of 1884 the W estern Catholic made a concrete proposal calling for a state board of education for Catholic schools to be composed of bishops, priests, and laymen. The board would be responsible for the appointment and supervision of teachers as well as for the regulation of the curriculum. This plan was not carried out, but the spirit of reform encouraged Archbishop Patrick A. Feehan to respond in 1887 by appointing an archdiocesan Board of School Examiners. The board consisted of parish priests, one each from the regular parishes of the North, ¡west, and South sides of the city, one representing the schools outside the city, and several representing the various ethnic parishes of the city. Although the board had little formal control over the schools, it did serve an important role in improving communication among parishes.

The Catholic school board was a symbol of the continuing Catholic commitment to parochial education in Chicago and an indication that many Catholics desired better communication among parishes and more uniformity in the

1857 -1923

Y - St: Aloy•lu• Co.,ve.!ff.

'W - sr. Jo,eph'1 t1ome .

-- r::r.;!;!'•rlsh eo-doriU ~ n •-Where t-tie:GrurCtoiujoFlre of 1871 orlJin•t-ed.

Many parishes had a patchwork collection of schools, some serving geographical areas and others organized by nationality. The lack of a central administration plagued Catholic churchmen for years. From Thomas Mulkerins' Holy Family Paris h, 1923. CHS.

Catholic curriculum from one parish to the next. But the board did not change the status quo immediately. In the 1890s Catholic schoolmen in Chicago faced many of the same problems that had plagued their predecessors fifty years earlier-lack of funds, disagreements over objectives, and conflict with the non-Catholic community. Yet the establishment of the board did foreshadow a centralization of control and an increased uniformity in the curriculum that would finally be realized in the 1920s under the leadership of George Cardinal Mundelein. Thus the creation of the board marked a transition in the history of Catholic education in Chicago.

From 1840 to 1890, Catholic schoolmen worried about the very su11Jivnl of parochial schools in Chicago, but after 1890 they wrestled with problems of the organization and control of those schools. After fifty years of struggle and uncertainty, Catholic education had come of age.

Se lected Source s Archives of the Archdiocese of Chicago, St. llfary of the Lake Seminary, lllundelein. Illinois.

James A. Mulligan Collection , CHS. Harriet R. Rosa Memoirs, CHS .

NEWSPAPERS: Chicago Trib11ne, 1849-1890; Western Catholic (Chicago), 1869-1889: Western Tablet (Chicago), 1852-1853.

Conroy, Joseph. Arnold Dame,,: A Chapter in the Making of Chicago. New York: Benziger Brothers, 1930.

Dunne, Finley Peter. Mr. Dooley's Opinions. New Yo rk: R . H. Russell, 1901.

Carraghan, Gilbert J. The Catholic Church in Chicago, J67JJ 87 J . Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1921.

Kucera, Daniel. Church-State Relationships in Education in Illinois. Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1955. llfontay, llf. I. A History of Catholic Secondary Education in the Archdiocese of Chicago.Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1953. l\fulkerins, Thomas M. Holy Family Parish, Chicago: Priests and Peof,le. Chicago: Holy Family Parish History Commissio n , 1923.

Pierce, Bessie L. A History of Chicago. 3 vols. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1937-1957.

Sanders, James W . The Education of an Urban Minority: Catholics iri Ch'icago, 1833-/965. New York: Oxford University Press, 1977.

Walch, Timothy. "Catholic Education in Chicago a n d Milwaukee, 1840-1890." Unpublished Ph .D . disse rtation, North western University, 1975.

Ch icago History

97

A Heritage Forgotten: Chicago's First Cast Iron Front Buildings

BY MARGOT GAYLE

That massive iron structure of architectural grandeur) which will defy the desolation of time) and the spoil of age. JJ a

Contemporary description of the city's.first cast ironfront building.

the Civil ,var a number of significant iron front buildings were erected on Chicago¡s main business streets. They were very handsome commercial sLructures. They were also archi Lecturally innovaLive, for they represented the first use in the West of the new cast iron archiLecture which was gaining popularity in New York, Philadelphia, and Baltimore.

These early iron front buildings, located mainly on Lake Street at ,vabash, SouLh ¡water, and Randolph at Wells Street, seemed very large at t!1e time when compared with the more modest brick buildings around them. All were five stories tall, vvhich was about as high as one could rent space in pre-elevator days.

They incorporated advantages which cast iron as a building material made possible: speed of construction because the iron parts were prefabricated and mass produced; very large windows because of the strength of the iron walls; and ornate decorative details at modest cost due to their reproduction by molding rather than by carving.

The design motifs that decorated each floor level featured columns that both enhanced the appearance of the buildings and strengthened them structurally. Moreover, the use of cast iron enabled arch itects to replace massive stone or brick piers with graceful interior columns as a means of supporting the weight of the floors.

V1Tith their richly ornamented panels and cornices, Chicago's first iron buildings were much admired at the time.

NOT LONG BEFORE

Margot Gayle is the author of Cast-Iron Architecture in New York and chairman of the organ izat ion known as Friends of Cast Iron Architecture.

98

Ch icago History

These buildings stood for little more than a dozen years before they were destroyed in the Great Fire of 1871. However, a second generation of iron front buildings rose immediately after the conflagration because owners of such buildings had found their performance in the great blaze as good or better than that of wood, brick, or stone structures. But as the years passed, most of this second generation of cast iron buildings was replaced and, eventually, forgotten. The reasons for their rise and fall in popularity are well worth examining.

The architect who introduced cast iron architecture to Chicago was John Mills Van Ostlel, to whom, according to historian A. T. Andreas, "more than to any one man, is Chicago indebted for the architectural improvement in her buildings, as he was the first architect to find employment here."

Largely seH-taught as an architect, Van Osclel had lived first in Baltimore and later in New York City, where he met the prominent Chicago businessman ¡w ill iam B. Ogden. The latter commissioned Van Osdel to design and build a home for him in Chicago. Van Osdel came to the city in June of 1837 and, presaging an interest in prefabrication, brought with him for Ogden's house window sashes built and glazed in New York as well as turned pieces for the staircase and the carved handrails. Back in ew York for the year 1840-1841, he served as associate editor of the American Mechanic, then returned to Chicago and became entrepreneur of a foundry and machine shop. He seemed glad to give that up when the city's principal builders persuaded him to become Chicago's first professional architect. He hung out his shingle in the winter of 1844 and went on to design many important Chicago buildings.

Cast Iron Buildings

Architect John M. Van Osdel (1811-1891) first introduced cast iron architecture to Chicago. CHS.

The demand for good-looking commercial structures and the pressure to provide them with speed to a fast-growing Chicago must have made Van O de! highly receptive to the use of prefabricated, precision-crafted cast iron building components which were becoming available at this time.

The idea of prefabricating cast iron building pans had been introduced to the United States in 18¡10 by .James Bogardus, a ew York inventor, on his return from a visit to England. There the technology for producing cast iron in quantity had been worked out in the eighteenth century. U ing this process, the English had engineered cast iron bridges and cast iron col umns in cotton mill comtruction and had shipped at leaH one "portable" iron building to Turkey.

Bogardus spread interest in the idea in the United States and by 1848 built an all-iron factory building in New York City in which he manufactured his patented grinding mills. This demonstrated the iron construction he had been advocating. After that he contracted to build many large buildings incorporating a great deal of iron construction both inside and out, among them the Sun Newspaper Building in Baltimore,

Harper Brothers' printing plant in Janhattan, and the Ledger Building in Philadelphia.

Bogardus was well known in the relatively small scientific community of his day. His inventions were displayed at American Institute fairs and written up in the America11 J'\1echanir and later in the Scientific American. He never had his own foundry for casting iron parts for his machines and buildings, but ordered them from foundries that made such iron product a stoves or pipes. That almost every small town had its own small iron foundry in the midnineteenth century may well have contributed to the use of cast iron components.

Chicago had several foundries. They produced the items needed for farms, homes, and small industries such as plows, farm tools, and machine parts as well as stoves and household utensils. Some began to manufacture architectural elements as well. The Washington Foundry and Machine Shop of Holmes, Pyott & Co. (established in 1855) added some architectural iron to its many cast iron products, especially interior columns; N. S. Bouton's Union Foundry Works, expanding from the small firm started in 1852, began to produce columns and lintels for storefronts as well as interior structural elements. So too did the Chicago Iron Works, established by Freel Letz & Co. in 1843, previously known for its vaults and bridgeworks.

But for the large scale precision castings for the high tyle exterior multi-storied iron fronts, architects turned to a few very big foundries on the East Coast which had developed this capability and had the skilled designers and pattern makers essential to the process.

One such firm was Daniel D. Badger's foundry, located near Bogardus' factory on Duane Street in what is now the civic center area in lower Ianhattan. Badger had come from Boston in 1847 to manufacture his specialty of metal rolling shutters supported by cast iron columns of storefronts. His first big order was to make these for A. T. Stewart's famous department store on nearby Broadway. In 1850 BogarChicago History

99

Cast Iron Buildings

dus arranged for Badger to supply such shutters for the big Sun Newspaper's iron building then under construction in Baltimore. Soon after, Badger began to advertise prefabricated, precision-crafted, and carefully detailed iron parts for entire building fronts. By 1854 he had formed a company called the Architectural Iron Works and built a large foundry on Thirteenth Street near the East River where coal and pig iron could be brought in by water.

It was to Badger's Architectural Iron Works that Van Osdel turned in 1856 when he was approached by several clients almost simultaneously and asked to build major stores and

offices for them. In the space of a few months he ordered almost 1,000 linear feet of five-story iron fronts for a total of twelve buildings with frontages which ranged from twenty-two feet to several times that width. Probably no other architectural foundry ever got so much business so fast from one source. In 1865, when Badger issued a large catalog of detailed wood engravings to give prospective clients a sampling of the designs available, he included three full pages of Chicago iron front buildings by Van Osdel.

Entries appearing in Van Osdel's account books (which survived the Great Fire) yield invaluable information about these structures and

The Burch building at Lake and Wabash and the adjoining cast iron fac;ades lent a touch of elegance to Chicago's pre-Fire business district. From Chicago Illustrated, Jevne & Almini , 1866-67. CHS, gift of Otto L. Schmidt.

100

Chicago History

Cast Iron Buildings

' · r,:1 'f . ·~~IJ.BJ ·: J? •.

Manufacturers of end Deal en in

TWIN 1~ !"'i

, \NU

Co1:.uA<~E.

f ;,111111 .~/fr,, /111d, .l/1 /lidt/u

,,,,,1 lf,,,!IJ,I.,

CoTTON AND fux TWINE s, f >1•

J•;, ('I'.'-' J11•Hi•1 • ipl i1111

'ID''l'.i i AWN1l\'GS. Ti\lIB\ULJNS~l:\GOXH h• 11011 !, I •: ( 'OYI-:

IJ/'

I(,<;

/'/fl,'n rir /.'11Altr-1· ti,n/Jtl biu·k fi,11,1/1111//, J,u,t.tl ,,,. 111,uf,, la f /,.,1, ,: '

1111

;:o:,& :r:o; '"'~-•!W.\TE I: 1 ........ ,

,,,11·,,11,

('HJ ( 'A (;().

~., "',.,,,,.

The Robbins Building, housing Gilbert, Hubbard & Co., ship chandlers, created a sensation as Chicago's first iron structure. From A Guide to the City of Chicago, 1868.

CHS, gift of Cudahy Estate.

their owners. The first entry for 1856 deals with Allen Robbins' commission for the city's first iron structure. It was to be a combination of store, offices, and warehouse at the southeast corner of South Water (now ,vacker) an<l ·w ells streets, then one o( the city's busiest intersections. Little is known about Robbins. It is clear that he never intended to occupy this building but constructed it as a real e~tate investment.

For Robbins' building- Yan Osdel selected a Renaissance style front with ten great roundarched windows extending across each floor of the ,vater Street facade and eighteen spanning each floor o( the \Velis Street side. The strength of the iron called for little more than the width of a fluted column between windows. With five stories of wide arched windows rising one tier

above the other the nearly all-glas~ surface must have glistened in the afternoon sun while allowing a flood of light to bathe the interior.

Yan Osdel employed a favorite architectural device of the time-he made each story shorter than the one beneath it. Some say this was to create the illusion of greater height, others allege that the lower floors commanded the highest rents and deserved the greater dignity afforded by high ceilings and spaciousness.

The Robbins Building represented an advance in building technology in Chicago. The commercial row buildings that lined the business streets of American cities at this time typically had side and rear walls or common brick to carry the load or the wooden beams, joists, and flooring. Slender cast iron columns supported the floors in wide-spanned interior spaces. The fronts or such buildings, whether made of stone or cast iron, supported themselves and nothing else. This was not the case with the Robbins Building, which occupied a corner lot and therefore had two iron Cac;ades. In Lhis instance the two iron fronts supported not on ly themselves but also some of the floor loads and thus created, in effect, an exterior iron frame. This principle would later be more Cully explored as architects experimented with ways to build higher structures. Indeed, a contemporary version of an exterior iron frame can be seen in the John Hancock Building erected on upper Michigan Avenue in 1968.

That this 1856 Robbins-Van Osclel-Baclger building created a sensation in Chicago can scarcely be questioned. Painted a light color, it looked like a Venetian palazzo and was certainly a departure in scale, ornament, and lightness of appearance from the stone, brick and wooden commercial buildings of mid-century Chicago. Henry Ericsson in Sixty Years a Builder called it "the most imposing structure in the heart of the old city." Newsman Frederick Cook in Bygone Days in Chicago, quoting an unnamed writer, described it as "that massive iron structure o( architectural grandeur, which will Chicago History

101

,.,.,.

F1· 11 11 I

~.l i ·\,1111111

101

F1· 1•d

'

l ull Ii·

,1 11d

,.Jf,,·1.,

1· 1111

, 1 ~ 11

Ill,

.v. -•

I •• •~

., ... lll•! , • I._., I• • ll, .~,.,.

AR CR I TE CT C RAL I R OX "W"OIIB S :): EWYO R !r

Frederick Tuttle organized adjoining property owners to agree on this harmonious cast iron fa9ade. From D. D. Badger's catalog for 1865, reproduced in Cast Iron Architecture in America, Da Capo Press, 1970.

defy the desolation of time, and the spoil of ages."

Until the Great Fire, the large firm of Gilbert, Hubbard & Co., ships chandlers, occupied this building. No photograph has come to light, but the firm used a wood engraving of the building in its full page advertisement in the 1868 pocket-siLed Guide to the City of Chicago to promote "twines and cordage, tents and tarpaulins, and horsecoYers of plain or rubber coated duck constantly on hand or made to order."

The engraving suggests that the Robbins Building resembled an existing iron front in Richmond, Virginia, which was recently restored and painted a creamy white. It "stops traffic," to quote an observer, which seems also to have been the case with the Robbins palazzo when it was new.

Entrepreneur John Link, who had come to Chicago around 1854 to do business in real estate and flour mills, commissioned Van Osdel to erect a spacious five-story building at the northwest corner of Lake Street and LaSalle.

Built in 1856, it had two exterior iron walls of striking design with simulated masonry blocks and fluted paired colonettes. Badger lists it in his catalog as a 150-foot iron front similar to the 102

Chicago History

1857 Cary Building in downtown ;\Ianhattan, one of the earliest and handsomest of New York City's surviving iron structures. In the Iron block at 205 East Wisconsin Avenue at ·w ater Street in Milwaukee one may see a different handling of a module similar to that used in Cary's and Link's. The building has recently been designated a landmark. ln 1857 Van Osdel began work on a long fivestory iron front building with eighty feet frontages on both Randolph and Wells. The client was former Chicago mayor Alexander Lloyd. .-\n old friend, Lloyd had been one of the group of lumbermen and carpenter-contractors who had persuaded Van Osdel to serve as a professional architect. Unfortunately the financial panic of 1857 intervened and, according to Henry Ericsson in Sixty Years a Builder, "brought about the failure of all Lloyd's enterprises." The building stood unfinished for years. An illustration of the completed building appears in Badger's catalog where it is called the Lloyd & Jones Building. It had an impressive far,;ade with balustrades and Venetian windows that gave it nearly as much window area as one of today's glasswalled buildings.

Unhappily, its elegance could not offset the

Cast Iron Buildings

Detail of window ornament for the Tuttle block. These and other exterior components were completely prefabricated and ready for installation. From Cast Iron Architecture in America , Da Capo Press, 1970.

disadvantages of its poor location away from the business section. According to journalist F. F. Cook the building was chiefly known for the Sunday night dances on its great upper floor. At other times this floor was used for military drills and was notably in demand in the mid-sixties when O 'Mahony's Fenian Army mobilized for the invasion of Canada. After the fire of 1871 its loss was estimated at $100,000.

In the 1858 edition of his promotional pamphlet Bogardus listed in all twelve Chicagoans who purchased cast iron architecture. Each was well known. For example, Isaac Burch, a banker, helped organiLe the Chicago Board of Trade and served on its board of directors. Bogardus may have been the contractor for the big Burch Building at the southwest corner of \Va bash and Lake streets. It combines perfectly with the adjoining row that Van Osdel erected in 1856 for Thomas Church and friends, which suggests that Bogardus may have worked with Badger.

So heavily had Burch mortgaged his building by 1860 that his creditors refused to take it when his bank ran into difficulties and stopped payments.

The peak of iron front elegance was reached with the completion of the eye-arresting block of Lake Street between State and " 'abash. This area had come onto the market as real estate after I 857 when Fort Dearborn was demolished,

releasing 56 acres that were soon transformed into a retail district. Each building had a different owner, but a continuous corn ice line and identical fac;:ades unifi ed the entire block.

Van Osdel was able to maintain simultaneous construction on the terrace rows on the north and sou th sides of the street thanks to the delivery of a steady stream of cast iron sections which had been polished, tested for fit, and treated with a primer coat of ant i-rust paint before leaving the New York foundry. Once in Chicago, the sections were hauled to the site on heavy wagons pulled by sturdy dray horses and stockpiled until the brick and wooden structures were ready to have their grand fronts assembled and bolted onto them story by story. Next came the installation of the big double-hung window sashes already filled with sheets of glass. So complex were these projects that Daniel D. Badger sent his talented architect, George H. Johnson, to Chicago to supervise the erection of the iron fronts as they were delivered.

The fronts for the north side of the block were sh ipped by Badger in the n ame of Frederick Tuttle, a prominent hardware merchant who apparently organized the neighboring landowners to join in purchasing 161 feet of identical Venetian-style iron fronts. The Tuttle block was actually the first iron front to reach completion, although it had been started after the larger Robbins Building.

Tuttle's building was on the northeast corner of State and Lake; moving eastward along the row were the premises of merchants Jason i\IcCord, George Collins, Tuthill King, and S. P. Skinner. The owners started out in perfect harmony, painting the entire terrace in the same light color. A ¡ time wore on and as tastes and ownership changed, the sections were painted \'arious colors.

On the south side of the block at the State Street encl was the venerable three-story City Hotel. To the east, with a startl ing jump in scale, were four white, high-ceilinged five-story iron fronts. Next to the hotel, Thomas Church, Chicago History

103

Cast Iron Buildings

Union Foundry Company at Dearborn and 15th streets, one of several firms that manufactured cast iron elements for Chicago buildings. From Two Years after the Fire ... Chicago Illustrated, 1873. CHS.

a self-made merchant from upstate New York, president of the Fireman's Insurance Company, and friend and supporter of Lincoln, built the 45-foot iron front building that would house for years the firm of D. B. Fiske, wholesaler of silks, ribbons, and straws. An unidentified contemporary accorded the facing rows of iron fronts the accolade: "In the late fifties this block was the finest architecturally in the city, with scarcely a rival on the continent."

But all this ended with the fire.

Some observers have claimed that the Chicago Fire led to disillusionment with cast iron as a building material. But this was not the case.

The East Lake Street owners rebuilt quickly so as to recapture their block's preeminence. Of course they wanted the latest styles. The incred104

Chicago History

ible Van Osdel again turned to his reliable supplier Badger in New York and ordered identical fronts for virtually all of the street's owners.

Frederick Tuttle's rebuilt warehouse and stores, rented in advance to Henry Sears for his cutlery and firearms firm, rose on the prominent northeast corner of State and Lake streets. The new building had a touch of the French Second Empire about its broad windows set under segmental stilted arches supported by paired narrow pilasters with Neo Greek detail. The iron panels were minimized to give more glazed wall area and to admit even more light than the earlier Italianate windows. A strong cornice line at each floor permitted tenants to display their signs. The other buildings belonged to M. D. Gilman, .J. W. Waughop, and Cornelius and William Price.

Cast Iron Buildings

A fairly lengthy list of post-Fire buildings could be made up from the pages of such publications as New Chicago: A Full R eview of the Work of Reconstruction; J.M. Wing's One Year from the Fire and Two Years after the Fire; the volumes of Industrial Chicago; and Randall's History of the D evelopmen t of Building Construction in Chicago. Full page illustrations in these publications show many structures being rebuilt with entire cast iron fronts while others incorporated some cast iron elements.

Views o[ the interiors suggest that standard construction called for a row of tall, slender columns which ranged from the front to the back of the building and supported the floor above.

Tuttle's double building stood beside one just like it owned by Henry Corwith. Stiles Burton chose the same modules for his new double 70-foot long store and warehouse across the street on the site of the burned City Hotel.

When Page Brothers rented this building at once for their leather business, it became known as the Page Building; in later years it came to be called the Loop Encl Building. We can still see this iron front today from the platform of the elevated tracks at the State and Lake Street Station. It now forms the Lake Street side of the Chicago Theater building and looks rather drab. This 1872 construction was only recently recognized by John Hern of the Commission on Chicago Historical and Architectural Landmarks.

Try to imagine this iron front, notable for its restrained design and very wide window openings, painted a light color and replicated many times along both sides of the block so as to give the effect of two lengthy, almost identical structures facing each other. In that first frantic year after the fire this block must have const ituted a gleaming affirmation of the city's ability to come back.

Allen Robbins-whose big iron building was also lost in the Great Fire- reasserted his belief in both cast iron and in Chicago by investing immediately in two new buildings containing

No sooner had the Great Fire destroyed Tuttle's original cast iron building when he put up another one at State and Lake. From Two Years after the Fire ... Chicago Illustrated, 1873. CHS.

much iron. Both were designed by Van Osdel.

One was a big five-story iron front warehouse on Wells Street across the street from his first one.

It filled every inch of its 80' x 150' lot on the northwest corner of Wells and Lake. Its style was severe: with its stilted segmental window arches resting on smooth attached columns, it bore some resemblance to two post-Fire Van Osdel buildings still standing within the Loop.

One is the surviving iron front best viewed from the elevated platform at State and Lake streets.

The other is the McCarthy Building, a fourstory stone structure, sometimes mistaken for cast iron, at the northeast corner of \Vashington and Dearborn streets.

The 1872 Robbins Building lasted until about 1960. In the course of time its ground floor storefronts were entirely altered and, perhaps an even sadder indignity for any nineteenth century commercial building, its pronounced roof cornice held on elaborate brackets was stripped off. Because it stood beside the key Ch icago Hi story

105

Cast Iron Buildings

Cast iron was used in the internal construction of many Chicago buildings well into the 1880s. This is from a portfolio advertising the products of Vierling, McDowell & Co . CHS , gift of Chicago Architecture Foundation.

intersection of elevated loop tracks at Lake and Wells, it can be discerned in the background of many photographs of elevated trains.

Across ,veils Street at the corner of " ' ater, on the site of his burned out 1856 palazzo, Robbins put up a big new warehouse with eighty feet of iron storefronts topped by four stories of masonry. The tall cast iron columns of the first floor storefronts held up the stone fa~ade, while interior iron columns marched down the 150-foot length of the floors to help support the building overhead. It was the archetypal American commercial building o[ the period and scores of structures more or less like it went up in Chicago in the immediate post-Fire period.

The flurry of new construction stimulated the growth of Chicago's iron foundries, which started on a miniscule basis and, with luck, expanded into substantial enterprises. The same thing was happening all over the country as the use of iron as a building material grew more and more widespread.

106

Chicago History

On the eve of the Civil War when Van Osdel was introducing cast iron architecture lo Chicago, he relied primarily on his dependable source, the Badger foundry in New York. 1onetheless, his account books show that he ordered not only interior structural columns but also two small iron fronts from N. S. Routon's Union foundry in Chicago. One of these was for Daniel McElroy's warehouse, at the corner of Dearborn and Randolph streets, and the other was for a store built nearby on Dearborn by George l\Iannierre and Hugh Dickey.

After the fire of 1872 it was a somewhat different story. Badger was still a major source of supply and Van Osdel still the principal proponent of iron architecture, but it is clear from the number of iron front buildings reported as being put up along the city streets in those hectic clays that many other builders were also using cast iron and that several foundries were supplying it.

Among the other notable cast iron buildings

Cast Iron Buildings

Cast iron store fronts such as this, sold by the number, may still be found in some Chicago neighborhoods. From Vierling , McDowell & Co. portfolio.

CHS , gift of Chicago Architecture Foundation.

erected during these post-Fire years were Miller Fry's ornate iron front office building recorded as costing $110,000; the Baird and Bradley Building next to it on LaSalle Street; William Pierce's cream-colored iron front with wide sheets of plate glass on ,vabash Avenue; and the U.S. Express Company Building at 58-60 Washington that lasted into our time, finally relinquishing its site to the Civic Center completed in 1966.

A new form of iron architecture-the decorative stamped sheet iron front over brick-made its first appearance in Chicago in 1872 on Lord & Smith's Building at 115 N. Wabash near Randolph. Indeed, ¡william LeBaron Jenney, often called the father of the skyscraper, designed a post-Fire iron front for ,vashington Street. His plans for this structure and for another in Indianapolis are pictured in the American Arrliitect and B11ildi11g Ntws of October 28, 1876.

, ,vhere have all the iron fronts gone? These four- and five-story commercial structures were demolished one by one to make way for larger buildings crowding into the Loop. l\1any of these new buildings were taller than the iron fronts and thus made more intensive use of land than their predecessors. i\fuch the same sort of thing was happening in other American cities.

In addition, the new Bessemer technology was providing steel in quantity for building purposes. But until it became available at a reasonable cost, most of the taller buildings here and elsewhere were erected with interior framing that incorporated cast iron columns because of their ability to carry heavy loads. Burnham and Root's Rookery of 1886 is an example still to be seen, as is Adler & Sullivan's Auditorium of 1889, and J enney's i\fanhattan Building of I 890 on South Dearborn Street. Of the latter, which was the first 16-story building in the world, Frank Randall wrote: "cast-iron columns were Chicago History

107

Cast Iron Buildings

One of the few surviving examples of cast iron architecture in the Loop is the Lake Street facade of the Ch icago Theater building . Comm ission on Chicago Historical and Architectural Landm arks.

used, steel being said to be too expensive. " Thus even though walkers thro ugh downtown Chi cago " ¡ill find barely a sign of the iron fronts of earlier times they will be passing by some o[ the city's finest late nineteenth century buildings containing cast iron elements. And if they direct their footsteps to such nineteenth century enclaves as Old T own and the streets near the old Dearborn Stati on they will find even an occasional iron storefront to reward their efforts.

108

Chicago History

Selected Sources John ~I. Van Osde l Accou nt Books, C H S. The Origins of Cast Iron Architecture in America. New York: Da Capo Press, 1970. Unabridged replicatio n of J ames Bogardus' Cast Iron Buildings: Their Con.~truction and AdT1antages (1856) a n d Da n iel D. Badger's catalog, I llustrations of Iron Architecture Made by the Architectural Iron IV01¡hs of the City of New fork ( 1865).

Str11ctural and Orna1nental Architectural I ron TVork . Ch icago: \' icrling. :, IcDowell & Co . 1188:;J. Portfolio o f drawings. C HS. Chicago I ll,ntraled. Chicago: Je,nc & A lmini, 186G- 186i. ln d1Htrial Chicago. Vol. I , The Building Interests. Chicago: Goodspeed Publishing Company, 18!)1.

The Land Owner.!) \O ls. Ch icago: J. M. \\'ing & Co., 1869-1877.

One Year from the Fire .

Chicago Illustrated. C h icago : J. M. \\' in g & Co., 18i2.

Two !'ears after the Fire . .

Chicago I llustrated. Chicago: J. ~I. W ing & Co., 1873.

Cook, F rederick Fra ncis. Bygone Days in Chicago. Ch icago: A. C. ~lcCl urg & Co., 19 10.

Ericsson, H enry. Sixty Years a Builder. Chicago: A. Kroc h a nd Son , 1942.

R a n da ll , Frank A. H istory of the Development of Build ing Construction ;,-, Chicago. Urbana: Un ivers ity of Illinois Press, 1949.

Ta llm adge, T homas E ddy. Arch itecture in Old Chicago. C hicago : Un ivers il)' o f Ch icago Press, 194 1.

William Dever and Prohibition: The Mayora I Elections of 1923 and 1927

BY DOUGLAS BUKOWSKI ÂŤ

Prohibition is needed as much in America as a fifth leg on a dog."

From the newspaper Narod-Polski

Chicago produced a unique kind of politician. John (Bathhouse John) Coughlin, Michael (Hinky Oink) Kenna, John (Johnny DePow) Powers and others came from the school for scandal in the city council.

They provided the text for many an embarrassing expose from 1900 to 1923, ranging from the easily bought aldermen of Charles Tyson Yerkes to the pampered "experts" brought in by Mayor William Hale Thompson. The almost genteel corruption of Carter Harrison II paled to insignificance when compared to the disgraces of the first two Thompson administrations, 19151923. The reformers were in a slump, and they desperately needed someone to pull them out of it and into City Hall. William Dever provided the coattails when he won both the Democratic nomination and the election for mayor in 1923. Thus began a four year period in which honest men attempted to enforce the Volstead Act, only to be repudiated by the rnters in 1927. v\Tilliam Dever was the quintessential American success, a self-made man. Born in Woburn, Massachusetts in 1862, Dever learned the tanning trade from his father. He decided that Chicago would be a good place to practice it, and he moved there in 1887. Three years later he graduated from John Marshall Law School and entered private practice. An ambitious man, Dever desired a career in politics and soon came to the attention of reformer Graham Taylor (founder of the Chicago Commons) as an honest and capable individual. Taylor helped put him into the city council in 1902 with personal and organizational support as an independent Democrat from the Seventh Ward on the ,vest Side. Dever stayed there four terms and earned a reputation as a champion of municipal traction ownership and equitable EARLY TWENTJETH CENTURY

Douglas Bukowski is a student of urban history at the University of Illinois at Chicago Circle.

gas and electric rates. He was elected to the bench of the Superior Court of Cook County in 1910 and remained there until 1923, when the exigencies of the Democratic machine made him a mayoral candidate with both regular and independent support.

George Brennan was a boss in a bind. Taking power after the death of Cook County Democratic party chairman Roger Sullivan in 1920, Brennan needed to produce a winner in the upcoming 1923 mayoral contest in order to solidify his control over the organization and keep potential opposition in check. He had three options. First, he could slate a candidate who promised more of a wide open town than Thompson had given Chicago. This proved an unlikely move because the city had grown weary-at least temporarily-of Big Bill and boodle, and a Democratic copy would have been neither appreciated nor elected.

Brennan's second alternative was to run Anton Cermak, the aspiring, wet Bohemian boss of the Twenty-second Ward and President of the Cook County Board. Cermak might have proven a strong candidate-indeed would in 1931-but the party's Irish hierarchy was unwilling to slate him. Instead, Brennan chose to run a clean candidate who would downplay the liquor issue in an attempt to gain both reform and ethnic votes.

Dever seemed the perfect choice. A handsome, well-built man of sixty, he stood to gain Progressive support from his relationship with Taylor. His struggle for municipal ownership made him palatable to the mildly reformist Edward Dunne-Carter Harrison faction of the party. If Dever could handle the Prohibition issue carefully, Brennan would have a strong candidate to throw at the Republicans.

Dever's chances improved with the withdrawal of the incumbent Thompson. The indictments of political allies-Governor Len Small on charges of embezzlement of public Chicago History

109

William Dever with black World War I heroes in 1923. In this election Dever received 53 percent of the black vote; in 1927 only 7 percent.

CHS, gift of Maureen Sullivan .

funds while serving as state treasurer and politica l strategist Freel Lundin, accused of milking the city school system of over a million dollarsleft Thompson weak. His situation worsened after a break with Republican State's Attorney Robert Crowe over the prosecution of gangconnected police officers. Fearing defeat, the mayor dropped out of the pany primary opening it to independent candidates. Arthur Lueder, the Chicago Postmaster, won and stood to face Dever.

Both candidates concentrated on municipal ownership as the critical campaign issue. Dever downplayed Prohibition and focused on crime.

"I do not want the people of Chicago to look upon me as a believer in the blue laws, because I am not," he informed one audience. "I know fairly well what the people want, but I promise that, if elected, I will put an end to crime, lawlessness and bestiality . . . . " Dever emphasized that "I am not a blue law man, but crime and vice must go."

110

Chicago History

The scandal-numbed voters of Chicago probably were impressed; the reformers definitely were. Julia Lathrop, Mary McDowell, Raymond Robins, Harold Ickes, and even golfer Chick EYans joined the Dever election camp.

This backing, though impressi\'e to members of the l\funicipal Voters' League, meant little to the Poles, .Jews, Italians, and Germans of the city without whose support Dever could not expect victory. And the immigrants were well aware of the Volstead Act. Chicago's foreign language press could have told any politician well-\'ersed in Slavic, German, or Yiddish that immigrant and firstgeneration Americans were O\'erwhelmingly Ket. The German paper Abendpost howled that Prohibition "means not only the confiscation of property, the destruction of the livelihood and employment of hundreds and thousands, and the restriction of the personal freedom of millions ... but it also means an actual rape of the Constitution itself." The Polish Dzie1111ik

~,.,,.,,,_,,...,

......

Sample ballot from the 1923 election in which Dever defeated his opponent, Chicago Postmaster Arthur C. Lueder. CHS, gift of Maureen Sullivan.

Zjr'd11oczenia claimed that Prohibition "is a ridicule o( common sense and the American public," while the Nnrod-l'olsl<i announced, " Prohibition is needed as much in America as a fifth leg on a dog. " The; Bohemian Df'nni Jllost('/ , reflecting Cermak's position, called for a modification of the Vobtead Act lo allow beer with an alcohol content of 3% and wine with one of 9%. The [<'1virlt Courier, although calling for sobriety from the Jewish youth, refused lo back the ban on liquor. The immigrant communities were wet, and a politician espousing anything else could expen trouble from them. Dever should have known this, especially in the liglu o[ two city-wide referenda, one in 1919 and the other in 1922, in which the voters overwhelmingly registered their displeasure with Prohibition.

The Brennan organization, though, did its work well by having Dever campaign primarily on the traction issue. The ex-alderman received endorsements from the Dzien nik Chicagoski, the Jewish Courier, and La Tribuna llaliana Transallantica. These papers concentrated on the service of the Democratic Party to the respective ethnic groups and did not question Dever's stand on liquor. The Abendpost sup-

ponce! Lueder, a German, while the black Chirngo n efr-11d<'r remained neutral. ll appears that the Defender's allegiance lo the Republicans was based in great pan on the presence of Bill Thompson on the ticket.

Thompson had done much to cultivate the black vote, particularly through his extensive me of pa tronage. The Def ender had endorsed him for re-election in 1919 and proclaimed on February I 0, 1923 that: Whatever the mayor's faults and shortcomings, and none of us arc perfect, it is an indisputable fact that the mayor enjoyed and still enjoys the unlimited confidence o( the masses o[ this community.

Unfortunately, the mayor is the victim of political ingratitude on the one hand and some soulless grafters on the other.

The paper reminded readers before the election that Thompson had thousands of warm friends and admirers who could be expected to vote for him in any future contest.

Dever and the county machine ran a tight campaign and won the April election, but the l 00,000 Yote plurality over Lueder was misleading. It came from immigrant communities extremely sensitive to the Prohibition question.

Should he lose that ethnic support, Dever would Chicago History

111

Dever and Prohibition

EVER

Window display in the 2nd precinct, 31st Ward office during 1923 election campaign. CHS, gift ot Maureen Sullivan.

face strong Republican opposition based on traditional German and black support. Dever's success as mayor depended , then, on maintaining an ethnic power base while establishing ties with elements of the Republican stronghold.

He erred from the beginning. His newly appointed police chief, forgan Collins, initiated a crackdown on the black and tan cafes, interracial night clubs inside or on the border of the black belt on the South Side. Raids netted as many as three hundred arrests, and the mayor vowed "to drive hard against every vicious cabaret, in every part of the city." He assured Chicagoans that he was not a blue law chap, "but these places are vile in the last degree" and had to be dosed. The Defender wondered aloud if the police were not more interested in vice in black neighborhoods than in white areas. Dever, perhaps overzealous and too color conscious in his first crime crusade, thus began the alienation of an extremely important voting bloc.

112

Chicago History

As 1923 wore on, Police Commissioner Collins shifted his attention from the clubs to the city's soft drink parlors. These were establishments licensed to serve non-alcoholic be\'erages. ~fore often than not, they were illegal saloons.

In .January of 1923 there were 6,565 of them. .-\ year later, Collins and Dever had revoked 2,100 licenses while convincing another 2,500 parlors to close \'Oluntarily. Collins then increased the scope of his raids, hitting otherwise legitimate restaurants and cafes in search of liquor. There were often arrests in the hundreds, and the commissioner even clamored for the power to enter businesses ancl homes without a search warrant as long as he had cause to believe liquor to be on the premises. Collins went as far as to arrest a mother of two in her home for operating a still and possessing thirty gallons of mash and moonshine.

Mother-arresting police chiefs are always unpopular, and Collins proved no exception.

On August 21, the Chicago Tribune-foremost

Dever and Prohibition

daily to oppose Prohibition-commented that, "it is more important to keep automobiles from killing people than to be raiding apartments and punishing the social irregularities of part of the town." Anton Cermak appeared amazed at Dever's dryness. Cermak defended the badly harrassed soda parlor operators, calling the closings unfair: The saloonkeepers thought they were doing no wrong in selling beer. It was understood there was an unwritten law under which the government sanctioned the sale of beer. The belief grew beca use the prohibition officers never made any arrests for beer selling, only for whiskey sales.

[Chicago Tribune, September 26, 1923]

Dever stood unmoved. In a speech before a crowd gathered for German Day Celebration on October 7, 1923, the mayor painstakingly outlined his position, presenting it as he would a legal brief. "I have never pretended to be and I am not a prohibitionist," he informed his listeners.

It is true, I am trying to make Chicago a place of law and order ... I have said many times that I wish the People of Chicago could have good, wholesome beer at a moderate price, but the poison that is being sold is not beer and even the price is not moderate .. . . Let us take it for granted that you and I do not like the Volstead Act-that we do not believe it is a good law. (There are two ways of working for its repeal.] One is to disregard it entirely, the other to enforce it until its injustice has so aroused the people that relief will come through the ballot box. The Volstead Act in Chi cago has been treated as if it did not exist and we have seen those engaged in the traffic carry their conflict into the streets.

There is only one way to stop it . . . enforce the law to the limit. Then when the city and the country have been dried up the people know the route to v\'ashington. There they can find relief. ...

The Tribune was not impressed with the mayor's reasoning. On October 20, l 923, it printed an editorial suggesting that Dever led with his chin instead of his head in treating

the liquor problem. It noted that "when a law does not have the support of the conscience of a people but when it is also regarded by them as tyrannical and unjust it can not be enforced."

Although Dever received an outpouring of mail condemning the editorial, it should have alarmed him to see who the writers were. Julius Ro enwalcl o( Sears, George Parker of the Parker Pen Company, and various ministers and temperance league officials exhorted him to continue his war on booze. There was no word, though, from blacks, Poles, or Bohemians on their reactions to constant raids and the threatened invasion of private residences. It was an ominous silence, one that should have alerted the mayor. Instead, Dever chose to escalate his anti-hooch campaign, for the first time concentrating on the city's gangsters themselves.

The mayor's decision placed him in opposition to John Torrio, head of the city's young syndicate. Torrio strove hard to build an alliance between warring bootleggers in order to systematize operations and maximize profits.

Having bought off Thompson and the police in l 921, Torrio was grossing close to $ 13,000,000 in beer sales and gambling and prostitution receipts by 1923. The harrassment from the new mayor was bad for business. It forced Torrio out of the city and into suburban Cicero as he waited for things to cool off.

They never did. Commissioner Collins refused bribes of up to SI00,000. He shut down breweries, intercepted beer shipments, and arrested gangsters as his police conducted citywide raids. The Torrio coalition crumbled as the bootleggers once again fought among themselves to establish larger markets.

Collins' success had far-reaching and unforeseen consequences for Dever. The crackdown led to an attempted gangland assassination of Torrio in 1925 and his flight to New York with the "capable" Al Capone left in command. Of equal importance was the publicity given the gang wars by the press. The papers took the increased violence as a sign of police weakness Ch icago History

113

Dever and Prohibition

in maintaining order ra ther than as an indication of the breakup of the smooth-running bootlegging operations. The Tribun e wrote: By throwing the emphasis on the closing of beer joints and pinochle games, police effort has been scattered and the security of persons and property has undoubtedly suffered.

Activity has been focused on liquor, gambling joints, dives, card games- these are given the emphasis rather than the protection of life and property. [April 12, 1925]

On July 30, 1925, the H erald and Examiner added its advice on how the almost daily killings could be stopped. It was imperative, noted the paper, to Stop burdening the police force with the gigantic task of hunting for gunmen after they have killed their victims. Prevent the holdup man from operating at all by running him out of town or putting him in jail and KEEP! 1 G him there.

The Hearst paper concluded that speakeasies, gambling, and prostitution were moral problems to be combatted by moral influences, not police arrests. Felony convictions were, in fact, on the rise, increasing from 12,000 in 1918 to 23,000 in 1927. The number of murders jumped from 134 in 1918 to 309 in 1927.

It is doubtful that Dever could have provided the safe streets the papers clamored for by disregarding Prohibition enforcement. He could not dismiss bootleggers and then go after robbers and burglars. ¡w ith the advent of organ ized crime, these men were often one and the same. Most people missed the link between bootlegging and other criminal activity and simply insisted that Dever do something to make the streets safe.

Criticism of Dever by former allies began when Clarence Darrow blasted the mayor at a banquet for Anton Cermak on October 6, 1924.

A Dever supporter in 1923, Darrow raised eyebrows with a toast to Cermak. "I can't get a drink without going to bootleggers, and I frequently want a drink," he confessed to the 11 4

Ch icago History

audience. " I thank God they exist . . . ." Pausing to level his stare at Dever, the lawyer continued, "I like Tony Cermak 'cause he's wet and 'cause he doesn' t make excuses .. . ."

The dail y newspapers followed the Prohibition controversy closely. In addition to their criticism of Volstead enforcement, they reported on police shakeups as Commissioner Collins searched for honest district commanders. They related the efforts of the soda parlor operators to regain their licenses and speculated when the next police sweep would occur. The mayor's appearance before the Senate Subcommittee on Prohibition in May of 1926 may have caught them by surprise.

Dever sounded much the same as he had when he addressed the German Day Celebration crowd three years earlier. He admitted to Prohibition's unpopularity but saw no alternative to enforcement. He suggested the creation of a commission which would undertake a serious and scientific study of the liquor problem and then release an objective report to the nation. Until then, Dever believed himself bound by his office to uphold all the laws of the Janel. To do otherwise would make him "plainly a traitor to his country." Having thus clarified his position, the mayor returned home, probably satisfied that his testimony would strengthen his chances for re-election.

Dever had a good record to present to the voters. He had continued the ambitious building program of the Chicago Plan- Wacker Drive opened in 1927-and had kept construction costs respectable. His selection of William McAndrew as school superintendent was a sound one. i\IcAndrew took important steps to modernize the system and to take the politics out of it. Dever had even tackled the city's traction problems; had the voters accepted his metropolitan transit plan, Chicago would have had a transit authority in I 925. If the mayor had a weakness, it was his Prohibition stand.

And if there was a man who could take advantage of that it was \i\Tilliam Hale Thompson.

Dever and Prohibition

l\t~

= ..~. f0 ,..= 0)

Ll_U

41/li

U~

(!'

GoodMomi~ Don't for get Our Neighbor

WILLIAM E.DEVER M

hr

J 'l.A--YOR.

?(our Po///n9 P lace .r~: / .:? .,-/

.,,(,,4 (,._,

_vz/_

Neich bor hood C lu b, 48th and 49t h ~OI

A voting reminder distributed by Dever supporters before the 1923 election. CHS, gift of Maureen Sullivan.

Big Bill Thompson emerged from retirement- he had kept in the public eye by staging an expedition "in search of tree climbing fish in South America"- to make peace with State's Attorney Crowe and other dissident regulars eager to return to power. The two-term exmayor easily won nomination in the party primary and immediately opened attacks on Dever. Thompson branded the mayor a traitor, a lackey to British interests which had commanded him to hire a first generation Scotsman- i\fcAndrew-to run the city's school system. Big Bill vigorously campaigned on an "America First" platform, and, lest that prove too ephemeral an issue lo capture the voters interest, he added another: "the Dever administration has made one of the greatest records in Chicago's history for closing up business.

When I'm elected, we will not only reopen places these people have closed, but we'll open I 0,000 new ones."

The implications of that promise were obvious to the clean government elements. Prominent businessmen formed the Independent Republican ¡ for Dever Committee, with .Julius Rosenwald, Sewell Avery, Stanley Field, and Edward Ryerson, .Jr. among its members. ]\[ary i\fcDowell, Jane Addams, Raymond Rob ins, and Harold Ickes again backed the mayor.

Brennan was confident of victory. "I can not believe the people of Chicago will repudiate honest and efficient government and turn the city over lo be ruled by the black belt, the g unmen, and 1he hoodlums."

Brennan's self-assurance was unwarranted because the Democrats were hard-pressed lo match Thompson, a master demagogue. Big Bill was at his "best" when he tole.I an audience of blacks that The mayor of Chicago, when elected four years ago, raised his hand to God and swore to upho ld the Constitution and the flag. The mayor stands branded tonight as the biggest crook who ever took oath.

I advise you today when we have a representative Ch icago Hist ory

115

Dever and Prohibition

of the king of England as mayor, to be patient and once more you will be emancipated and this time

by Bill Thompson. [Chicago Tribune, March 12, 1927]

Thompson was a spellbinder if nothing else, and his xenophobia fell on many sympathetic ears in the postwar capital of isolationism. ,vith the aid of underworld contributionsin their book, Big Bill of Chicago, Lloyd Wendt and Herman Kogan estimate Al Capone's donation at over Sl00,000-the Republican conducted a whirlwind campaign. He promised to lead black voters out of the slavery of the Dever administration: "when the time comes, we'll show the Cossack mayor that he's up against a buzz saw, and a buzz saw isn't any joke." He pulled the British lion's tail to the delight of Irish audiences, and reminded Germans of his snub of General Joffre when the French hero visited Chicago shortly after the encl of ,vorld , ,var I. And he constantly attacked anything connected with Superintendent McAndrew: "the university [of Chicago] is a conspiracy to distort American history on behalf of the king of England. The university highbrows got Dever to bring in l\IcAndrew, a stool pigeon for King George . ... " There may have been many isolationists in the city, but there is little evidence that they linked Dever to ¡wilson and Versailles. Voters listened to Thompson because he talked wet.

Where alcohol was part of an immigrant culture, Dever's vigorous enforcement efforts could only be an affront. Thompson's words, on the other hand, were a balm: "when I am again mayor of Chicago, policemen will be back doing police duty instead of being snoopers against personal liberty."

Big Bill claimed that the opening of 10,000 saloons would promote sobriety among the young. In an address before a woman's club he told the audience to "look at the boys and girls now being ruined by drink. That will all be changed when I get in and restore moderation and abolish crime." A vote for Thompson would 116

Chicago History

Three powerful political figures: Democratic party boss George Brennan, Mayor William Dever, and Fire Commissioner Joseph F. Connery in 1926. CHS.

have both sociological and patriotic efiect. "If you elect me mayor," he promised, "I will assist in attempting to repeal the un-American Volstead Act." This was sll'eet music to the ears of the voters who, in yet another referendum-held in November 1926-Yoted against Prohibition 427,000 to 166,000.

Dever defended himseH only weakly. He cited his duty as an elected official to uphold all the laws and reminded audiences that Thompson had enforced blue Jaws back in 1915. Few were interested in the achievements of his administration. ,vith his candidate faltering, Brennan entered the breach and injected race as an unofficial campaign issue. The police again raided black nightclubs, and Brennan warned black politicians of punish-

Dever and Prohibition

Mayoral candidates in 1927, "Big Bill" Thompson (left) and William Dever with their wives on a gala occasion. CHS, gift of Maureen Sullivan.

ment if they backed Thompson and Dever won.

He provoked the fears of South Side whites d1rough pamphlets claiming that Thompson would destroy their neighborhoods and he enlisted prominent Chicagoans to speak out against the ex-mayor. John Fitzpatrick of the Chicago Federation of Labor accused Thompson of using 70,000 non-union blacks for strikebreaking in 1921. Raymond Robins, a respected Progressive, claimed that Thompson "offers to open the city as a haven for the lower type of colored man, the crap shooters and crooked 1egroes from all parts of America," while J\faclay Hoyne, ex-state's attorney and an independent mayoral candidate in 1919, pinned responsi bility for the 1919 race riot on the Republican challenger.

The only major daily to support Thompson was the H erald and Examiner, which accused the mayor of allowing special political interests "rich rewards from beer running and booze se lling, gambling and vice throughout the city."

Dever kept the support of the Dziennik Chicagoski, the Jewish Courier, and La Tribuna Italiana Transatlantica because these papers saw the Democratic Party as the political vehicle for their respective ethnic groups (the Democratic candidate for city treasurer was a Pole, J\Iatthew Szymczak). He added the support of the Tribune and the Daily News.

Despite his well-known Anglophobia, Colonel Jv fcCormick preferred a Democrat to a clown who caricatured his own views. His paper editorialized: " it may be the city's misfortune to Chicago History

117

Dever and Prohibition

go back into the political dark ages. The return of Thompson can be regarded as nothing but just that." The Daily News favored Dever as the most promising candidate to help the city in "escaping another period of Thompson maladministration ." ,,Vith this impressive official support, Dever hoped to overcome Thompson's attacks on his Prohibition stand.

Instead, Dever lost the election by some 83,000 votes. A comparison of voting patterns in 1923 and 1927 shows a definite erosion of Dever's ethnic support: Democratic Vote for Mayor in 1923 and 1927 (excerpted from Allswang's A House for All People) Czech Pole Lith. Ital. Jew Negro Ger. 1923 76% 76% 82 % 80% 57% 53% 45% 1927 59% 54% 57% 42% 39% 7% 37%

In 1923 Dever had received strong support from increasingly Democratic Czechs, Poles, Lithuanians, Italians, and Jews and a surprising majority of blacks. A majority of the German vote went to Lueder, himself a German. Four years later the voting pattern changed drastically. The Czechs, Poles, and Lithuanians gave Dever smaller majorities while the Jews, Italians, and especially the blacks, swung over to Thompson. The Germans continued their traditional support of Republicans. The heavily black Second and Third wards gave Big Bill a 46,000 vote plurality, a strong indication that Brennan's threats and tactics had little effect.

Had Dever maintained his immigrant votes, he could have overcome h is opponent's advantage in the Second and Third and won re-election.

118

Ch icago Hist ory

He did not because of his Prohibition stand.

The Tribune correctly gauged the city's sentiment after the election when it noted that "Mayor Dever's heel of Achilles was his police policy in respect to Volsteadism and its allied problems." The paper concluded that "Dever's regret that the law was the law was nothing to a wet people to whom Thompson said that the law wasn ' t going to be enforced by him." The Herald and Examiner gloated. The voters "knew what they wanted, and they announced their wishes with a definiteness and uniformity in all parts of the city that can not be mistaken." Indeed, the paper was right. The voters wanted a change from Dever and his administration. So reform ended in 1927, rendered powerless by Chicagoans who showed a greater preoccupation with thirst than honesty.

Selected Sources \l'illiam De,er Pa pers , 50 folders , CHS .

William l)e,er Scrapbooks, 49 vols., CHS. NFWSPAPERS: Chicago Daily News; Chicago Defender; Chicago Evening Post; Chicago Herald and Examin er ; Chicago Journal; Chicago Tribune. Translations of A bendpost; Dziennik Zjed11oc1.1mia; Narod-Polski; Denni Hlastel; Jewish Courier, obtained from the Chicago Foreign Language Press S1,rvey, Works Project Administration.

Allswang, John M. A House for All Peoples. Lexington: The University of Kentucky Press, 1971.

Gottfried, Alex. Boss Cermak. of Chicago. Seaule: University of Washington Press, 1962.

Wendt , Lloyd and Kogan , Herman. Big Bill of Chicago. New York: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1952.

Library Exhibit From Our Collection

This ambrotype, together with other items such as rare books, maps, menus, city directories, broadsides, advertising cards, and scrapbooks, will be on display in the From the Collections Area from .June 15 to September./, 1978.

of Henry Klinkel's Lager Beer Saloon at what is now 1623 North Wells Street (present site of a Treasure Island food store) was taken about 1856 by an unknown photographer.

It is one o[ the earliest surviving photographs of a Chicago scene and a welcome addition to the Society's collection o( early historic photographs.

It was first reproduced in Chicago and Its Mal<ers but was mistakenly identified as a daguerreotype (photograph on a silver-coated copper plate) rather than an ambrotype (photograph on glass).

During the 1840s and 1850s many German immigrants settled in the area of Chicago now known as Old Town. Henry Klinkel was one of them and was first listed in the Udall and Hopkins city directory for 1852-53 as living on "Wells near Cemetery" (the old city cemetery at North Avenue and Clark Street, which later became part of Lincoln Park) . Before turning to saloonkeeping Klinkel had been a shoemaker, then a grocer. Gager's city directory for 1856-57 carries the first entry [or Klinkel's Saloon on "Wells between North Avenue and Linden" (now Eugenie Street). He died in 1863 or 1864THE AMBROTYPE

for Halpin's 1864-65 city directory lists: "Klinkel, widow Henry, residence east side North Wells, north of North Avenue".

There is some speculation as to the significance of the man standing on the roof and clutching the Aag. Is it an affirmation of patriotism in the face of the anti-foreign-born sentiment prevalent in Chicago in the micl-1850s? The flag-waving Native American Party reached the peak o[ its influence with the election of Mayor Levi D. Boone in 1855. To appease the prohibitionists who helped elect him, Boone enforced an ordinance prohibiting the sale of liquor on the Sabbath, thus provoking the Lager Beer Hall Riots of April 21 in which the German community defended its right to drink beer on Sundays. (See "In a Ferment: Chicago, the Know-Nothings, and the Riot for Lager Beer"

by R. \V. Renner in Chicago History, Fall 1976.)

Another possibility is that the photographer was afraid that if the flag were allowed to flap freely in the breeze it would appear as a blur on the photograph, given the time needed to take a long exposure. ¡w hatever the case, this unique image-which has survived for 120 years-has found a permanent home in the graphics collection of the Chicago Historical Society thanks to the generosity of i\fr. and Mrs. Robert Jesmer and Mr. and l\Irs. David C. Ruttenberg.

JOHNS . TRIS FORMER CURATOR OF GRAPHICS

119

Looking Backward Celebrating the Fourth of July

As recorded by newspapers in the collection of the Chicago Historical Society DANIEL BOORSTIN pointed out several years ago that Americans were slow in cleveloping jJatriolic forms and symbols. Chicago's celebration of the Fourth of July bears this out. Responsibility for organized demonstrations fell on ad hoc groups which provided irregular city-wide celebrations in the I 840s and 1850s. The city's growth soon made these impractical. Thereafter, individual activity predominated, with social, ethnic, and political groups planning their own celebrations. It was newspaper writers who created the myth of a long tradition of a city-wide celebration of the old-fashioned Fourth.

A constant and universal feature of Chicago Fourths was noise. Larger and larger quantities of gunpowder were used each year. Loss of property and the number of wounded and dead grew apace until the toll of the Four/ h approached that of a small battle. A campaign to curb the use of explosives came in the first decade of the twentieth century. The success of this movement and the advent of the automobile led to our more contemporary modes of celebrating !he Fourth.

Early newspapers made no mention of the holiday . Only in the early 1840s did the Chicago Daily American report that Chicagoans had organized themselves for the Fourth.

At an adjourned meeting of the citizens, held at the Sa loon, to make suitable arrangements for the celebrat ion of the 4th of July .. . [an] Order of the day for the celebration of the 4th of July [was fixed].

At sunrise, a National Salute, 26 guns from the Public Square. At 9 o'clock (a.m.) a gun will be fired for the assembling of the ;\I ilitary and other Associ ations, at the ir respective places of meeting.

At 10 o'clock by signal from gun, the several i\f il itary Companies and other Associations, with the Citizens generally ... wiII be . . . formed in general procession on the public square.

The procession wiII be marched through the pr incipal streets to the Presbyterian Church, where the Declaration of Independence will be read by G. \V. l\feeker, Esq., and an oration suitable for the occasion be delivered by l\fark Skinner, Esq. During the movement of the procession, guns will be fired at proper intervals. [July 2, 1842] The archetypal celebrations of the 1840s and 1850s soon passed. In 1852 the Chicago Daily Times contrasted the decentralized Chicago celebration with that of the city's neighbors: 120

Ch icago History

The Fourth of July I GRAND

8-Hour Demonstration PIC-NIC! SOCIALISTIC LABOR PARTY, and other Labor Organizations,

on the4th, 5th, and 6th of July, 1879,

OCDEN'S CROVE. IRA STEWARD, of Boston; P, J, l cGUIRE, of St. Louis, and other Labor Reformers (in all la.DguaRea).

All ,t·ho takt' Jtart in thl' 1•roc.-esslon will be aatlmllted to the ,:rore

r~

11'1e ~e,Mlwli.1,1c,n\Unnui,I..J1•nll 1....,11,J •• l'1W1Je.o wlal,111.: ti, ,·1,1, U.. c,ily fO .. ,......i tbl• p-n.l HI~.,. ol.,~cun,lot> n.l<'a ln;,,11 lb.,lkl lo lloc,~tliot J11l1,

n,n10, .. 11'Ml.... ('110 . ,.• u I.hem·

Ethnic and political groups used the Fourth as an occasio n to display their patriotism as this announcement from the July 5, 1879 Socialist illustrates. CHS.

While glancing over our exchanges for the last few days, and seeing in all, the ardor with which preparations have been made, for the due honoring of the everlastingly glorious Fourth of July, in every city, town , and village, disappointment and shame have involuntarily crept over us-we have felt ourselves humbled, nay, we may say, disgraced ....

Is it that our city, the Queen of the \Vest, that Chicago, should stand alone in not having made arrangements for the due celebration of our Independence struggle, and our glorious triumph.

[July 3, 1852] Even the Civil War fail ed to spark a unified celebrat ion. The Chicago Daily Tribune elaborated !he myth when it recalled on July 4, 18M: The waving of flags, the flourish of trumpets, the clang of arms, the boom of cannon, the sharp pistol cracks and the display of fireworks have been the outer and more democratic signs of patriotic fer,·or. . . . A scarcely less silent but more rational expression was vented in the assemblage of the people around some hoary representative of former da)S who, with eyes uplifted, spoke of the blessed liberty inaugurated by the signing of that glorious document-"the Declaration of Independence"which was then read with heads uncovered. The joyous party and the times have changed since then ....

Looking Backward

One of the largest Fourth of July crowds in Chicago 's history is shown at the Columbian Exposition in this drawing from the July 5, 1893 Herald. CHS.

Unlike the Bicentennial celebration one hundred years later, no great enthusiasm appears lo have been generated in Chicago by the Centennial celebration of 1876.

The Centennial Fourth, like the hundreds o( Fourths which preceded it, has passed into history.

Nothing remains to-day, so far as Chicago is concerned , save a large numl)er o( headaches, the smoldering ruins o( a few smallsized conflagrations, an occasional thumbless hand, and a general feeling o( used-upness .... Since the War, the average Chicagoan has taken comparatively little interest in "the day we celebrate." . . . Yesterday was no exception. \,Vith a patriotism that is nowhere else manifested, the Chicagoan celebrated the Fourth in his own inimitable style. He didn't celebrate as a component part o( Chicago or as an American citi,en. He simply celebrated lo suit himself.

[Chicago Daily Tribune, July 5, 1876]

Th e excitement of the World's Columbian Exposition in 1893 drew a crowd of close to 300,000 Chicagoans to the fair grounds lo celebrate Independence Day.

The great crush in the Midway was amazing at noon. It became worse as the afternoon wore on.

At 5 o'clock the jam was so terrific that guards had to clear the way (or ambulances ... fireworks such as the world had never seen before were to be burned [in the park]. The street [the Midway] was brilliantly illuminated. There were two miles of Japanese lanterns along the roadway, not to reckon the thousands of incand escent lamps that burned in bazar and minaret. The great Ferris Wheel was aflame with red fire . . . . Little difference did it make to the countless throng on the lake front whether Theodore Thomas' musicians played the Hungarian Rhapsody or the vorspiel for "Lonhengrin." The crowd was too busy seeking choice spots from which to v iew the fire works that began to paint the sky at 9 o'clock to pay more than passing attention to the music.

[Chicago Herald, July 5, 1893]

As th e city grew, the Chicago resident remained conlenl lo celebrate "lo suit himse lf." The Chicago Herald of July 4, 1888 noted that:

There will be the usual number o( picnics and jim crow excursions,â&#x20AC;˘ but no arrangements have been made for any public demonstrations. The good old days when the oldest inhabitant got up on a dry goods box and read the Declaration of Independence and sixteen young girls sang the 'Star Spangled Banner' from the band wagon have passed away. Explosives were in heavy use ... despite the annual warnings that are given by parents the Fourth o( July witnesses from ten to twenty fatalities. â&#x20AC;˘ A "jim crow" or "jimmy" was an open railroad freight car, so that presumably this expression meant a trip in an open train or tram car.

As Chicago became more crowded, the carnage of th e Fourth became greater. No limit was placed on the size of firecrackers: dynamite caps were in common use, as was loose powder. The direct loss of life, fingers, and limbs was compounclecl by deaths from tetanus days later. Hundreds of fires resulting in upwards of f,1,000,000 in damage were set by the explosions.

Unrestrained individualism was under attack in 111a11y areas of American life after 1900 and individualism in the celebration of the Fourth was no exception. A committee for a "Sane Fourth of July" was formed in 1908 lo promote a unified observance of the holiday ancl lo make it safe. Through legislation ancl propaganda the movement made major strides in 1910 and 1911.

Chicago History

121

Looking Backward

The Tribune of July 3, 1910 supported a "Sane Fourth" with a full page of comics as well as front page stories. CHS.

The Chicago Daily Tribune's headlines announced a "sane" Fourth:

WhÂŁle th e regulation of fireworks drew people, th e automobile soon dispersed them again.

Chicago Looks on 'Sane' Pageantry All Able-Bodied Inhabitants Turn Out to Cheer Great "Fourth" Display

Autos on Holiday Trail

Parade, Then Journey Arrays of Soldiers in Gorgeous Procession Precede Floats of the Nations Spectacle Supersedes Deaths The Spirit of "76" and the spirit of 1910 Chicago blended harmoniously yesterday to produce a Fourth of July celebration by far the most wonderful Chicago has ever seen.

Chicago patriotism burst forth, not in the form of accident and disorder but of pictorial display.

[July 5, 1910]

122

Chicago History

l\fany thousands have already hit the holiday tra il that leads to resorts in Michigan , Wisconsin and Indian a, but the bulk of the traffic is expected to be experienced before noon today as the family flivver is pointed countryward . [Chicago Daily Trib une, Jul y 4, 1928]

Th e Fourth of July was now celebrated in the sam e manner as we do today. Small fireworks were cxjJloded by children, but larger ones were limited lo safe displays. Most Chicagoans took to th eir cars in search of a good time and celebrated to suit th emselves.

FRANK JEWELL REFE RENCE LIBRARIAN

Reviews Illinois: A History

by Richard J. Jensen New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1978. 8.95 . addition to the series of Bicentennial histories of the fifty states and the District of Columbia sponsored by the American Association for State and Local History and funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities.

Professor Richard J. Jensen of the University of Illinois at Chicago Circle and the Newberry Library and author of The Winning of th e Midwest: Social and Political Confiict, 1888-1896, has produced a crisp, insightful essay on the development of Illinois. Asked to write a short, interpretive history, he explains in the preface why he chose to get beneath familiar events to deal with lifestyles and goals.

"Mine will be a story of conflict and accommodation between groups of people." Deliberately avoiding the usual historical categories like liberal and conservative factions or upper, middle, and lower classes, he works with three basic sets of values which have caused people to behave differently.

"Traditionalists" and "modernizers" hold sway throughout most of the book. Their conflicts often spilled into the political arena, and thus Jensen uses election returns to illustrate the fears, aspirations, ideals, and prejudices of Illinois voters. In the final chapter we meet the " postmodern" people.

Jensen's traditionalist clings to long-established customs, is skeptical of progress, maintains strong ties with kinfolk, and is comfortable under authoritarian leaders. The earliest settlers, migrants from Kentucky, Tennessee, the Carolinas, and Virginia, fit this mold. They cherished male supremacy and family loyalty while downgrading book learning and the work ethic. Irish and, later, Italian and Polish immigrants and blacks ensconced traditional values and patterns of behavior in the towns and cities. Religious observance anchored the identity of the traditionlists; priests and political bosses protected their enclaves.

Modernizers in Jensen's construct believed in "efficiency, progress, independence, education, science, technology, and, especially, strict self-disciplined internal motivation, as against values rooted in family loyalty or religious authority." The first of this breed in Illinois were Yankee reformers touting abolition, mass education, temperance, hard work, and cleanliness. Reinforced by other New Englanders and settlers from 1 ew York and Ohio, the modernizers pressed for transportation improvements and developed manufacturing. They saw to it that children o[ the traditionalists were exposed to modern va lu es in the public schools and won them over with well-paid, challenging jobs. Jensen credits these go-getters with transforming Illinois "from a la1y man's paradise to a dynamic modern society."

The process o[ conversion was interrupted from time to time by angry confrontations, such as the THIS JS A DISTINGUISHED

quarrel over the Edwards school law, the spirited elections of 1860 and 1896, and the assault upon the German community during World War I. Jen sen handles these clashes adroitly. The trauma o[ the depression, and more particularly FDR's courtship of ethnic voters and city bosses, revived many of the traditional values. But World War II, with its emphasis upon planning, technology, and science, constituted a sweeping victory for the modernizers. In the 1950s, television, new highways, and consolidated school districts wiped out the last pockets of traditionalist localism. The stage was set for postmodern values: rejection of technology, optimism about the future, public and private authority, and the work ethic. While everyone was affected to some extent by the shift in values, Jensen maintains that "the most dramatic changes appeared among blacks, youth, Catholics, and career women."

Fitting Illinois history into this framework inevitably raises questions about balance in the material included, exceptions to the groundrules, and omissions of people, places, and events. This reviewer would have welcomed the occasional use of Illinois authors to relieve the steady diet of politicians who clinch Jensen's points. ¡what is the difference between Armour and Swift family nepotism in meatpacking and immigrant or black family reliance upon parish ties or political machines to aid kinfolk? Are not the career women late-blooming moddernizers seizing opportunities previously denied?

Well, one of the virtues of Illinois is its ability to provoke readers to ask for equal time! Certainly, however, they will be impressed with the vast amount of material tucked into this short book and its even-handed treatment of farm and factory, immigrant and native-born, and small towns versus the colossus (though Chicago monopolizes Donald Getsug's picture essay). Best of all, Richard Jensen accomplishes this with clarity and wit.

LOUISE C. WADE

Pulling No Punches: Memoirs of a Woman in Politics

by India Edwards New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1977. $8.95.

Here I Am-Take My Hand

by Marie Brookter with Jean Curtis ew York: Harper & Row, 1974. $7.95.

ALTHOUGH THEY DIFFER greatly in other respects, the women who wrote these memoirs share one central value: an intense commitment to the American political system. India Edwards, the first woman placed in nomination for the vice presidency at a major party's convention (l 952), and Marie Brookter, the first black advance-woman for a national

Chicago History

123

Reviews

political campaign (I 972) , have given us straightforw ard accounts of their own struggles and achievements. Indeed, one purpose of these basically optimistic autobiographies is to encourage more women to participate actively in political life.

Drawing the title of her book from President Truman's advice that she " pull no punches," India Edwards provides a candid but selective record of some of the famous, talented, and colorful persons she encountered during two careers. The narrative moves quickly from h er years of growing up as a proper young lady in Nashville at the turn of the century to learning n ewspaper work from some 0ÂŁ the legendary figures of Chicago journalism when Edwards was first employed as a novice reporter for the Chicago Tribun e during World \Var I. She then interweaves an account of her career of nearly twenty years as the Tribun e's society editor and later its women's editor with her personal experiences : young widowhood, remarriage, and the rearing of her son and daughter.

When her husband's work forced the family to move to the East Coast in 1942, India Edwards decided to follow her political interests of many years by volunteering to write Democratic campaign literature. She soon moved into administrative posts with the party's \>\/'omen's Division and eventually became vice chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Even though Edwards resigned from this position in 1954, she has retained her political ties to the present day and served in place of the vice chairman during the 1968 Democratic convention in Chicago .

An early and devoted supporter of President Truman, Edwards acted as "hostess" for the Tru man women on the 1948 campaign train. In October 1951 , President Truman, who reciprocated her loyalty and respected her political judgment, offered Edwards the chairmanship of the Democratic National Committee. But she declined, fearing that male politicians would not cooperate fully with a female chairman and that the party would suffer.

In her memoirs she regrets this decision as one of the great mistakes of her life. Clearly she does not doubt her ability to have handled the job. (Over twenty years later, in 1972, Mrs. Jean Westwood became the first woman to serve as chairman of the DNC.) Ironically, revised party rules abolished the Women's Division as a separate power base soon after the 1952 convention where Edwards' name was placed in nomination for the vice presidency. Women were to be integrated into the general party organization despite her misgivings that the new arrangement would tend to subordinate them in practice if not in theory. Even the nomination was symbolic: convention chairman Sam Rayburn knew that India Edwards would withdraw her name. " Otherwise," he maintained, "I wou ldn't let any lady's name be put into nomination."

124

Chi cago History

A black woman of a more recent generation , l\[arie Brookter tested the boundaries of the " new politics." In 1953 Brookter, a young widow, faced a difficult struggle to build a life for herself and her daughter. But her cousin had been shot clown at his own front door because he attempted to register to vote and Brookter decided to leave their native Louisiana . In Chicago she found employment, earned a college degree as a part-time student, and passed up a better-paying civil service job which would have restricted her political activities. Instead she volunteered to work in her spare time for her local alderman and for Congressman William L. Dawson .

Brookter was an experienced grassroots organizer by the time she joined John F. Kennedy's organization in 1960. She portrays Kenn edy as a tough and calculating campaigner, a highly professional politician whose praise for a job well clone was therefore all the more gratifying to his staff. For Brookter political activities brought not only personal satisfaction but new opportunities as well. After the campaign, she worked foi; the Equal Employment Opportunity Committee in Washington, D.C., was employed by the anti -poverty program in Chicago, and later did public relations work for a local television station.

Disheartened by the assassinations in 1968, Brookter waited until 1972 and the McGovern campaign before returning to full -time political work. In contrast to her earlier successes, however, Brookter found that working as an advance person in a campaign organization noted for its idealistic but inexperienced staff was full of frustrations. She finally registered a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Committee. Fortunately for the reader, Brookter argues her case by presenting a fascinating clay-by-day journal, an insider's view of the nitty gritty workings of the campaign, particularly in Chicago .

While neither India Edwards nor Marie Brookter tries to minimize the limitations of the roles that were allotted to women, both authors found unique opportunities by becoming loyal members of the team . Their books are not introspective analyses, rather they offer patterns: Edwards managing a career and a family, Brookter showing how to make connections and take advantage of the possibilities in a new situation . They urge women and minorities to support the political aspirations of members of their own groups because no one else understands their needs as well.

LINDA J. EVANS

Reviews

Ring: A Biography of Ring Lardner

by Jonathan Yardley New York: Random House, 1977. 12.95. soME FACETS of the Ring Lardner story brought to center stage this season by Jonathan Yardley will surprise readers. Septuagenarians who remember Lardner's humorous newspaper columns and magazine yarns about baseball players, bumpkins, and suburbanites in the 1920s and 1930s have probably forgotten that his style had an important influence on Ernest Hemingway, F. Scott Fitzgerald (Lardner's close friend), and lesser American writers. And most young readers probably know little, if anything, about the life of this talented member of the Chicago press corps who became one of the most financially successful American writers of his time.

Yardley researched with persistence to produce this balanced reassessment of the complex and controversial career of the Midwestern baseball writer and Chicago Tribune columnist who surged into big money and the limelight as a literary figure in the prohibition-plagued I 920s, and then, when only 48 years old, faded to an early death on September 25, 1933. Tuberculosis was the killer, abetted by overwork, alcohol and-as Yardley reminds us-nagging disappointment that his fiction, magazine articles, and books were losing their immense popularity with publishers worrying their way through a depressed economy.

Two-thirds of the book deals with Lardner's boyhood and his Chicago years. This emphasis reflects the author's earnest determination to record stage by stage Ring's development in the Midwest from a starry-eyed young baseball fan with a flair for words into a nationally important literary figure. Born into a leading family in Niles, l\Iichigan, Lardner early on became a hopelessly hooked baseball fan who treasured the rare days when his father brought him to Chicago to see the White Sox. He eased into newspaper work first in South Bend, Indiana, and in 1907 landed a sports job at SIS.SO per week on Chicago's Inter Ocean, moving quickly on to Hearst's American, then to the Examiner where, incredulous over his good fortune, he was assigned Lo cover the White Sox at home and on the road.

That was the beginning of several priceless formative years of travel with both the White Sox and the Cubs for the Examiner and the Tribune (which gave him his first Tribune by-line in l\farch 1909) .

During this period, baseball players were his companions and friends, and Yardley finds that this experience laid a firm base on which Lardner's future literary success was built. "In Pullman smoking cars, hotel lobbies, and stadium clubhouses, he listened to the talk of baseball people," Yardley writes, "unconsciously storing it in his memory as the basic resource for the fiction that would come in later years. When he was not talking with baseball people he was watching them at play,

and the judgments he reached about the nature of excellence and the search for it would profoundly affect his outlook upon the larger world."

Seventy pages are devoted to Lardner's six years (1913 to 1919) as editor of the Tribune's "In the Wake of the News" column. Yardley is convinced that in this period Lardner's skills and views matured and his genius bloomed, and it became clear that he was not just a sports writer but a humorist whose work deserved to be classed with that of George Ade and Finley Peter Dunne, older Chicago newspapermen who had already won national recognition by 1913. All three portrayed the Midwest and the vernacular of its people, but Yardley holds that Lardner's ear was the sharpest of the three, that he "heard the speech more accurately than anyone," and that in the "Wake" he learned to articulate it.

Lardner's national fame zoomed in 1914 when the Saturday Evening Post printed "A Busher's Letters Home" which introduced the enduring character Jack O'Keefe. The immediate favorable response resulted in more O'Keefe stories for the Post. These were published in 1916 as a book, You Know Me Al. Lardner's popularity continued to grow. In 1919 he went to New York to begin the .. ,veekly Letter" newspaper column which Bell Syndicate sold throughout the country for the next seven years.

Lardner was now famous and wrote steadily, but he never wrote a novel, despite pressure from friends and his publisher to do so. The conventional assessment is that this failure has denied him a place among the great of American literature.

Yardley demurs. He holds that Lardner was a miniaturist who could not cope with the demand to do something big in order to be great. And this was not necessary, in the biographer's opinion, because Lardner's achievements as they stand are worthy of "our respect and gratitude."

For those whose interests lie in American literature as well as those concerned with Chicago history and yesterday's professional baseball, this book will add valuable insights and provide a lot of reading pleasure.

HAROLD E. HUTCHINGS

Union Mai d s a.film by Julia Reichert, James Klein, and

Miles Mogulescu 'cw Day }"ilms. Black and white: 48 minutes.

STORY OF WOMEN in the labor movement not merely as cata!ysts but as militant organizers has only recently begun to unfold in fi lm. In the wellresearched, carefully-crafted The Inheritance and in Barbara Koppel's Academy Award winning Harlan THE

Chi cago History

125

Reviews

County U.S.A. women emerge alongside men as initiators of action and insistent fighters when workers' rights reach a nadir. When wrongs have been righted and workers have a contract, men manage the affairs o[ the union with women often in ancillary roles.

Union Maids is the story o[ three valiant, sometimes feisty Chicago women-Sylvia, Stella, and Kate-now somewhere past retirement age, who were organizers in the industrial unions during the early militant days of the CIO. Coming to Chicago from rural backgrounds, they found work: Stella in the stockyards, Sylvia in a laundry, and Kate in a pharmaceutical factory. They found themselves brutalized by capricious foremen, long hours, and an almost total disregard for human rights by managements with all the power.

The three women are all voluble storytellers and are quite articulate about their beliefs, feelings, and motivations. Stella and Kate are especially eloquent about their Socialist theories, their feminism, and their single-minded dedication to union militancy. Sylvia compensates for a lack of theoretical vocabulary with a highly developed instinct for justice. With great personal courage all three confronted company goons, police with night sticks and sawed-off shotguns, and the indifference (born o[ [ear) o[ their fellow workers.

The producers, Julia Reichert and James Klein, recorded the interviews on black-and-white videotape which they transferred to film. Though the images have a focus most kindly described as so[t, the strong personalities of the interviewees transcend the fuzzy form. Intercut with the crisplyedited interviews are shots taken from newsreel footage and still photographs from the time. To the chagrin of the purist, this archival visual material does not always reflect accurately what the women are saying. No matter. The struggle to organize was similar among all unions and the spirit of the intercut material reflects the confrontations in Chicago.

Supplementing the visuals are many of the vigorous songs born of the labor movement: the title song itself, "Carry It On," "We Shall Not Be Moved," and many others.

Stella, still the conscience of the movement, has some parting advice for present clay conservative unions. Urging them to return to their roots, she advises them to organize the unorganized, become more militant, and be concerned with non-union interests such as protecting and educating the consumer.

Union Maids in its gray format does not have a slick commercial look but this very lack gives the film a ruggedly honest feeling despite an occasional factual misalignment. Not innovative in form, it is more important as a document than as a movie.

If it is true that we see in color but believe in black and wh ite, then Union Maids is a most credible film. To the surprise and delight of its 126

Chicago History

producers it was nominated for an Academy Award.

This recognition was justly earned.

J . PAUL CARRICO

Neighborhood

by Andrew M. Greeley New York: The Seabury Press, 1977. $10.95. the line the Irish muse appeared and whispered in the ear of Andrew Greeley. Out o[ this consultation came Neighborhood, the newest addition to the ever expanding Greeley library.

The Irish have a fantastic ability for telling stories and Greeley has benefited from this tradition. The book is an honest memoir from a man who not only loves, but respects, neighborhoods. Although it is not as academic as his Ethnicity in American Life nor as powerful as The Communal Catholic, it approaches an often neglected part of Chicago, the ethnic communities which have given the city its birthright.

Greeley apologizes for the non-academic character of the book from the beginning and indeed this is not the type of book that tenure committees like to review. It simply is too alive and emotional for the dusty halls of academe. Neighborhood is a very human book. Idealistic at the outset, it ends witl1 information gathered at the National Opinion Research Center and on an angry note lashes out at the enemies of neighborhoods everywhere whether they be unthinking city planners, greedy politicians, or those very members o[ tenure committees who would ignore Greeley's work.

Greeley has selected four districts and four streets o[ the city and explores their contributions to urban communal life. He is perhaps at his best when describing his own West Side Irish neighborhood and his adopted Beverly on the far Southwest Side o[ the city. His sections on Bridgeport and on Polish Stanislowowo are also interesting and capture much of the ambience of those areas. Above all, the text and photos by the author which introduce the various sections succeed in giving a sense o[ the endless variety o[ the neighborhood experience.

While Greeley points out that neighborhoods are natural places for people to live, he acknowledges that their future may indeed be very grim because urban planners and administrators do not feel that neighborhoods are important and in fact view them as counterproductive, almost assuredly parochial (spelled racist), and not worth worrying about. Andrew Greeley, however, is worried along with an awful lot of people who prefer this type of life all across Chicago and the nation.

Greeley may be accused of romanticism, especially in the first part of his book, but he still renders a service that more traditional sociologists SOMEWHERE ALONG

Reviews

fail to do: he recognizes the complexity of the ethnic society that has been created in America, a society that-if the author is to be believed-is alive and well on the side streets of Chicago. It is a culture that exists despite the stupidity of urban planners and the elitism of certain academics and politicians. It will continue to exist, according to Greeley, because men are social beings.

A recent visitor to the Newberry Library from Georgia expressed his amazement at the ethnic and racial diversity of Chicago. It simply dumbfounded him. It is of this diversity that the muse spoke to Greeley and of which he speaks to us in Neighborhood.

DOMINIC A. PACYGA

Illinois Voters Handbook edited by Elizabeth M. Garber Chicago: The League of Women Voters of Illinois, 1976.

26th edition. $3.95. Available by writing the Citizens Information Service at 67 East Madison Street, Chicago 60603.

IN THE 26TH EDITION of the Illinois Voters Handbook, the League of Women Voters has continued a tradition of putting out the single most comprehensive work on Illinois government. The League is to be complimented on its effort to provide Illinois with an up-to-date and accurate account of lllinois government. The term "Voters Handbook" does not do justice to this comprehensive undertaking which deals with Illinois government-state and local, judicial, administrative, and legislative.

The vast coverage, including maps, tables, and charts, makes it a source of quick reference.

The handbook has an excellent level of accuracy for a high school or college civics class dealing with Illinois government. A quick, accurate answer to a straightforward question about Illinois government may be located here. The editorial staff is to be commended upon its lack of bias. ¡where issues are treated in an area where the League has taken an affirmative position, it is not apparent in the text.

This is best illustrated in viewing cumulative voting, home rule, and township government.

However, the strength of the handbook is probably the source of its two weaknesses. It attempts to cover too comprehensive an area to deal with many issues in depth. First, the content and organization show the unevenness of growth that has forced the editorial staff to add material in areas of immediate concern without an even growth and development in other areas and without their taking a new look at the structure of the handbook.

The organization is wanting in that it is difficult to ascertain the principles behind its structure. The initial chapter is on a specific topic, voting, which in an uncertain way seeks to act as an introduction.

The next two chapters deal with local and state government, while the next three return to specific topics (justice, education, and environment). While the final chapter is entitled Service, it is in reality a catchall for leftover topics. It would suggest that the time is ripe for the editors to write an introduction to tell the reader and themselves how they believe their handbook should be organized and then restructure it accordingly.

This leads me to a second problem area: the handbook has an unevenness of treatment. For example, some areas are treated without regard to legal background, while others cite specific legal cases. I would suggest that the handbook either expand to treat legal concepts more evenly and accurately or avoid dipping into this area beyond very simple generalizations. Other topics are treated with an uneven hand. Some are slighted in comparison to others. A certain minimal standard should be established.

In no sense should the League abandon the compilation of this very valuable handbook. Perhaps some thought should be given to putting out two books: a simple handbook for civics classes and related uses and a more in-depth and detailed study to offer students of Illinois government the degree of detail and understanding that the League of Women Voters is so uniquely capable of providing.

SHELDON GARDNER

Grinding It Out: The Making of McDonald's

by Ray Kroc with Robert Anderson Chicago: Henry Regnery Company, 1977. $9.95.

RAY KROC, the man who built the McDonald's world-girdling hamburger chain, is an interesting man. His autobiography is no less so because he is also a candid man. Kroc began selling Lily paper cups in 1922 because he "sensed the potential ... was great." Kroc helped realize that potential by showing his customers how to do more businessand use more cups. He convinced Walgreen Drug Stores to introduce carry-out service, using Lily paper cups. Then he spread the idea everywhere he could, including the in-factory food service at United States Steel Corporation.

Kroc discovered a wonderful improvement on the old style milk shake in Battle Creek, Michigan, and introduced Earl Prince, owner of Prince Castles, to it. The first year Kroc sold Prince Castles five million sixteen ounce cups for their fabulously successful ice-milk shake, the "One-in-a-Million."

Earl Prince then developed that metal collar so shakes could be made directly in the cup, dispensing with the metal mixing cans. But the dramatic demand for the new style milk shake burned out the old style single-spindle mixers. So Prince in-

Chicago History

127

Reviews

vented the Multimixer, that round, five-spindle mixer so familiar in the soda fountain of a few years ago. And Ray Kroc marketed these inventions. In 1938 he left Lily Tulip to push the Multimixer full time.

It was Multimixer that led him to the McDonald brothers' drive-in. Their restaurant, in San Bernardino, California, kept eight-count them, eightl\Iultimixers operating. Kroc had to see an operation that could generate that kind of demand for milk shakes. He flew out from Chicago, and within days had negotiated an agreement with the brothers to spread those McDonald golden arches, fifteen cent hamburgers, milk shakes, and fabulous french fries across the country. At 52, Kroc was just beginning. During the next twenty years he developed the largest food service organization in the world, with sales well over $3 billion annually, and reaped a magnificent personal fortune in the process.

This is good autobiography. Kroc is as honest in this book as he has been in business-completely.

He is candid about his obsession with work; about the toll it took on his family; about the policies, people, and finance in his business; and about his own opinions. This is also good business history.

He shows why he was such a good salesman, whether with Lily cups, on a short sojourn as a real estate salesman in the heyday of Florida land speculation, or in building McDonald's. He is frank about the pattern of incentives and goodwill that makes for good business practice. l\IcDonald's, for instance, is not in the real estate business nor in the supply business because such commitments would create conflicts with the company's role as a restaurant franchiser and with its responsibilities to those holding the franchises . Kroc's great success, and McDonald's, flows from the ability to keep company interests largely identical with those of its local owner-operators. And Kroc tells the secret behind those french fries and the Egg Mc Iuffin.

Some readers will not like Kroc's simplistic notions about the free-enterprise system, but this fast paced book has much to tell us of American business enterprise and of one man who makes the system go.

FRED V. CARSTENSEN

Stateville : The Penitentiary in Mass Society

by James B. Jacobs Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977. S12.50. have resided in or visited a penal institution. For most, impression of prison life are the result of viewing a heady mix of Grade B movies or of reading pulp and mass-media exposes of squal id prison life. In this monograph sociologist and legal scholar James Jacobs attempts to examine the life cycle of prison organization from an histor-

RELATIVELY FEW CHICAGOANS

128

Ch icago History

ical perspective; his subject, Stateville, is one of the most famous maximum security institutions in the United States.

When it was constructed in 1925 Stateville was the culmination of a series of correctional reforms that originated during the Progressive era. Specifically, it was an attempt to ameliorate an overcrowded, physically dilapidated, and scandal-ridden Joliet Prison. Reforms such as merit systems and the establishment of the new offices of sociologist-actuary and state criminologist were designed to improve a patronage-swollen, corrupt, and inefficient penal system.

Between 1925 and 1975 Stateville passed through four distinct stages. The first eleven years were marked by anarchy resulting from a staff void of expertise in prison management and lacking career commitment. The 1930s depression was paralleled within the prison by idleness, deterioration in discipline, and the total collapse of a daily regimen.

Authority shifted from appointed officials to Chicago gang leaders and, ultimately, to Warden Joseph Ragen.

Ragen, a former sheriff from a rural Illinois town, ran Stateville from 1936 until his retirement in 1961.

He created his own independent political base by courting the press, law enforcement agencies, and elected state officials. Warden Ragen exercised personal control over every detail no matter how minute. Stateville was transformed into an efficient paramilitary organization.

Between 1961 and 1975 the institution experienced recurring drift and crisis as penal institutions throughout the country were forced to react to outside influences that included the changing racial composition of the prison population, interventionist attitudes of the courts, centralized authority, professionally-trained security officials, increased prisoner activism, and the organization of public employees into unions.

Currently Stateville is in a state characterized by a reexamination of programs and attitudes concerning the nature and direction of incarceration. The need demonstrated by tl1e author to provide a safe and humane environment and to foster programs that assist the reintegration of convicted felons into society is important to Chicago. The vast majority of Stateville's 2,500 population is from Chicago.

Stateville is excellent sociology. However, as history it suffers from several omissions. There is a failure to place the movement for penal reform in both an historical and a comparative perspective.

Is Stateville's story akin to the history of Cook County Jail? The all too brief discussion of ethnicity and prison organization prior to the 1960s is barely adequate. This is most unfortunate in light of the author's detailed and penetrating analysis of the impact of such prison associations as the Black Muslims and Chicago street gangs, including the Blackstone Rangers, Vice Lords, Disciples, and Latin Kings.

Reviews

However, the attached appendices, particularly the careful and thought-provoking discussion of participant observation among prisoners, will be rewarding for individuals interested in doing oral history.

Stateville is a study deserving of careful attention.

One disappointment is the inclusion of only city names in the index, making it difficult to use the book as a reference work for individual architects and stations.

Tn[ SAMUELSON

EDWARD H. MAZUR

Waiting for the 5:05: Terminal, Station, and Depot in America

compiled by Lawrence Grow New York: Main Street Press, 1977. $12.50 cloth, $6.95 paper. is probably one of the most expressive indicators of America's architectural tastes during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Because these stations represented both the railroads which built them, and the communities in which they were located, their design evolved into an architectural forum by means of which both parties could publicly proclaim superiority over all rivals. Stations were designed to impress the visitor with motifs freely adapted from the most popular architectural styles of the time, yet were often tempered by uniquely regional characteristics. Although ranging in size and cost from the monumental columned spaces of Lhe big city terminals to the simple fret sawn eaved structures of rural areas, all stations were created equal in terms of the pride and interest put into their construction by their backers.

Based largely on the traveling exl1ibition TERMINAL, STATION AND DEPOT IN AMERICA, sponsored by the Smithsonian Institution Traveling Exhibition Service, Waiting for the 5 :05 is an extensive illustrated catalog tracing the architectural development of the American railroad station. Each chapter is devoted to a specific architectural style or building type, documented with excellent photographs and drawings culled largely from the archives of the Historic American Building Survey and the Historic American Engineering Record. The editor wisely elected to delete extensive coverage of the more famous stations which have been published in many other sources and instead concentrates on lesser known, but equally important, structures. A brief summary introducing each chapter relates the station type to both the utilitarian and decorative aspects which infiuenced its creation. Each station illustrated is accompanied by an informative caption listing dates, architects, and other pertinent information. Architecture buffs will be especially pleased with the separate chapters devoted to stations designed by architects H. H. Richardson and Frank Furness.

TIIE RAILROAD STATION

Chicago's Rapid Transit Volume I, Rolling Stock, 1892-1947, published in 1973 as Bulletin 113 of the Central Electric Railfans' Association, $15.00.

Volume II, Rolling Stock, 1947- 1976, Bulletin 115 (1976), $23.00.

Interurban to Milwaukee Bulletin 106 (2d ed., 1974), $15.00.

Route of the Electroliners Bulletin 107 (2d ed., 1975), $15.00.

Available from the Central Electric Railfans' Association, P.O. Box 503, Chicago 60690. are written for the interurban and rail transit enthusiasts. They are not by any means the history of rapid transit in Chicago, or of the Chicago, North Shore, and Milwaukee, which is the subject of Bulletins 106 and 107, but they provide some of the raw material from which those histories may eventually be written. All four volumes are elaborately illustrated. The collection and publication of this mass of pictures may indeed be their most important contribution to the history of mass transit in the Chicago metropolis.

This is certainly true of Bulletins 113 and 115, the volumes on Chicago rapid transit. They consist almost entirely of pictures plus tables and diagrams providing elaborate technical detail on the rolling stock used at various stages on the rapid transit lines of Chicago. There is very little text, and what there is is explanatory rather than historical. From the illustrations and diagrams it is possible to trace the development of the transit system's equipment, but the significance of the changes is nowhere discussed. These are books for specialists and enthusiasts. By themselves they have very limited historical value.

The two volumes on the North Shore system have considerably more substantive historical content. This not only makes them more attractive to the general reader but also gives them a definite value for the history of Chicago and in fact for u rban and railroad history generally. The North Shore was one of the most important and longest lasting interurbans. Starting in 1894 as a strictly local and small-scale street railway operation in ¡waukegan, it grew to be an elaborate rail system linking two major cities (Chicago and Milwaukee) and including on its route such substantial communities as Evanston, Waukegan, Racine, and Kenosha. Until 1919 Evanston was the southern TIIESE BOOKS

Chi cago History

129

Reviews

terminus for North Shore trains; passengers in and out of Chicago had to change there. In 1919 an arrangement was finally completed whereby North Shore trains used the Chicago elevated tracks all the way into the Loop.

In an era when the interurban and the streetcar have all but vanished from the American scene, it is fascinating to read of the North Shore operating limiteds and extra fare trains, complete with dining car service. The line was also equipped to handle baggage and express and carried a fair amount of less than carload freight. There are accounts here of special needs that had to be met. In both world wars the North Shore canied heavy traffic for Fort Sheridan and the Great Lakes Naval Training Station, and it had to build additional track and station facilities to accommodate the Eucharistic Congress of 1926.

These accounts are essentially glimpses. The narrative sections of these two volumes are heavily focused on operational and technical matters : construction, equipment, schedules, etc. The treatment of finances is sketchy, although the North Shore went through an almost continuous series of crises.

Two prominent financiers who were inl'olved with the system, George A. Ball and Samuel Insull, are mentioned almost casually. 1or, despite an interesting description of the extension of the system through the Skokie Valley, is there any real discussion of the North Shore's influence on the development of Chicago's northern suburbs.

These matters, of course, are not the primary interests of the body of readers for whom these volumes were compiled, so that the compilers were justified in taking the approach that they did. But they are matters vital to a complete understanding of the history of the Chicago metropolis and of urban (including interurban) rail transit.

In summary, these four volumes are attractive works of art which will appeal to rail transit enthusiasts everywhere, and they have historical value within a narrow spectrum. But the full history of rapid transit in Chicago and of the Chicago, 1orth Shore, and Milwaukee remains to be written .

JOHN B. RAE

The Reviewers - J.

Pau l Carrico teaches in the History of Architecture and Art departmen t at the University of Illinois at Chicago Circle.

- Fred V. Carstensen teaches in the departments of history and economics at the University of Virginia and is currently working on a corporate biography of International Harvester Company.

- Linda J. Evans is assistant curator of manuscripts, CHS. - Sheldon Gardner has served as chief of the Civil Division for the State's Attorney of Cook County and teaches courses in local government law.

130

Chicago History

- llarold ÂŁ. Hutchings retired as exec11tive editor of the C/1irago Tribune in 1972 and as Tribune Company archivist in 19i7 .

-Edward H. Mazur is associate professor of urban studies at Chicago City-Wide College.

-Dominic A. Pacyga is co-author of Chicago: Moving through the Past to be published by the Society later this year.

- John B. Rae is professor of the history of technology, emeritus, at Harvey Mudd College.

- Tim Samuelson is assisting the Richard Nickel Committee with the preparation of a study of the architecture of Adler & Sullivan.

- Louise C. Wade, author of Gmham Taylor: Pioneer for Social Justice, 1851-1938, teaches in the history department at the University of Oregon.

The Society the Chicago Historical Society hosted a conference to discuss and explore the possibility of making the Society a major center for research and interpretation of American urban history with a special focus on the history o[ Chicago. This conference, whose participants included CHS staff members and some of the nation's leading urban historians, was an important part of the planning process that has been going on at the Society for the past six months with the support of a Chairman's Grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities. This planning project gTew out of my own strong- feeling that the Society can play an important role as an independent center for stimulating and supporting the study and interpretation o[ urban history, both on the scholarly and popular level. Our resources in this area are already extremely strong; our collections of books, artifacts, manuscripts, photographs, prints, and other historical documentation are among the richest and most diverse in the nation. Our staff already plays an important role in serving- scholars and researchers, while our publications and public programs already reach a wide audience. Why then the need for a "center" for urban history?

There are several answers to this quesIN MAY OF THIS YEAR

Notes

tion. To begin with such a center could perform an important role by bringing together our academic and public audiences.

It is clear that there is a growing audience for history to be found in the schools, in the neighborhoods, and in homes throughout the city. It would be a great mistake to underestimate the motives of the crowds of people who visit museums and restorations and who are drawn into reflecting about the past by such television programs as Roots and Holocaust . For such people the Society can provide a meeting place and the opportunity to pursue their special interest, whether it be to ferret out a particular fact, to check the background of some controversia I issue, or to recapture the spirit of some great public event.

It is in the Society's interest as well as in the interest of our various audiences and users to engage as many people as possible in the adventure of history. If we can engender and nurture a more active historical consciousness among members of the public, then the burden of collecting, preserving, and interpreting the information and materials of the past can be shared among many rather than remaining the special responsibility of a few.

These are some of the reflections that have come out of the discussions about a possible center for urban history. So far these discussions have involved a large number of our staff as well as collaborators from the academic community. Now we want to hear from our members, our readers, and others who are interested in the history of Chicago and of urban America. I urge those o( you who have suggestions as to what the agenda for such a center should be and what kinds o( programs it should offer to send me your ideas.

I look forward to hearing from you.

~ - _'=::Q

Kukla, Fran, and Ollie Festival From October 9 through 14, the Chicago Historical Society will present a daily one hour showing o( Kukla, Fran, and Ollie kinescopcs from the collection given to the Society by Burr Tillstrom, creator o( the show. The festival will conclude with a lecture and discussion by l\lr. Tillstrom on October 11. See the Fall Calendar of Events for details.

Chicago Public Library Following the completion of the recent restoration o( the Chicago Public Library Cultural Center, the Library's Special Collections Division has been sponsoring a continuing series o( exhibits and publications.

Treasures of the Chicago Public Librnry ( 12.50), compiled by Thomas Orlando and l\farie Gccik, is a guide to the library's holdings and includes descriptions o( many rare books, pamphlets, and manuscripts related to the history o( Chicago.

Those interested in the architecture and interior design o( the library building should consult the excellent pamphlet issued by the Commission on Chicago Historical and Architectural Landmarks.

It is available for fi(ty cents by writing the Commission at 320 N. Clark Street, Chicago 60610.

From Our Readers Paul \V. Guenzel 0ÂŁ W'ilmette and the Reverend Robert Schaibly 0ÂŁ the Beverly Unitarian Church have drawn our attention to an error in the caption on page 247 in Looking Backward in the Winter 1977-1978 issue. In the Reverend Shaibly's words, " 1\Iorgan Park Academy though no longer 'military,' continues to enhance the high quality o[ li(e in the Beverly Hills-J\ forgan Park neighborhood."

Joseph C. Meredith o[ Park Forest South. commenting on the caption under the photograph on page 39 o[ the Spring 1978 issue which refers to the use o( mechanical power in toppling the Sky Ride tower at the end of the CENTURY OF PROGRESS asks "As a matter of fact, wasn't thermal power used?"

Grant T. Dean responds," You are quite right about the use o( Thermit on the cast tower" to burn through "the structural elements."

Samuel Insull, Jr., commenting on the Fine Arts article in the Spring 1978 issue notes that Mrs. Samuel Insull had "very little, i( anything, to do with the building o( 20 Wacker Drive and its two theaters, except to criticize my father for allowing the architects to pay only $5,000 to Jules Guerin for painting the curtain." He adds that Samuel Insull turned over the "whole question o[ rentals to Stanley Field ."

Alan D. Whitney of Winnetka, commenting on the same article, brought a collective blush to our visages by pointing out that the words over the entrance arches to the building are (ewer than we claimed and read: "All passes-Art Alone Endures."

Directo Ch icago History

131

THE CHICAGO HISTORICAL SOCIETY Clark Street at North Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60614 Telephone: Michigan 2-4600

OFFICERS Theodore Tieken, President Stewart S. Dixon, rst Vice-President James R. Getz, 2nd Vice-President Gardner H. Stern, Treasurer Bryan S. Reid, Jr., Secretary

Harold K. Skramstad, Jr.

The Chicago Historical Society is a privately endowed institution devoted to collecting, preserving, and interpreting the history of the city of Chicago, the state of Illinois, and selected areas of American history. It must look to its members and friends for continuing financial support. Contributions to the Society are tax-deductible and appropriate recognition is accorded major gifts. The Society encourages potential contributors to phone or write the director's office to discuss the Society's needs.

TRUSTEES

MEMBERSHIP

DIRECTOR

Bowen Blair Philip D. Block III Cyrus Colter Emmett Dedmon Stewart S. Dixon James R. Getz Philip W. Hummer l\Irs. Frank D. Mayer

Andrew l\fcNally III i\rthur E. Osborne, Jr. Bryan S. Reid, Jr. Gilbert H. Scribner, Jr. Harold Byron Smith, Jr. Gardner H. Stern Theodore Tieken i\frs. Edgar J. Uihlein

LIFE TRUSTEES

Willard L. King l\frs. C. Phillip l\filler Hermon Dunlap Smith HONORARY TRUSTEES

l\fichael A. Bilandic, Mayor, City of Chicago Patrick L. O'i\Ialley, President, Chicago Park District

Membership is open to anyone interested in the Society's activities and objectives. Classes of membership and dues are as follows: Annual, $20 a year and Governing Annual, S1 oo a year. l\fembers receive the Society's quarterly magazine, Chicago History; a quarterly Calendar of Events listing Society programs ; invitations to special programs; free admission tO the building at all times ; reserved seats al movies and concerts in our auditorium; and a 10 % discount on books and other merchandise purchased in the l\Iuseum Store.

HOURS

Exhibition galleries are open daily from 9:30 to 4:30; Sunday from 12 :oo to 5:00. Library and museum research collections are open Tuesday through Saturday from 9:30 to 4:30 except for July and August when they are open Monday through Friday. The Society is closed on Christmas, New Year's, and Thanksgiving.

THE EDUCATION OFFICE

offers guided tours, assemblies, slide talks, gallery talks, craft demonstrations, and a variety of special programs for all ages, from pre-school through senior citizen.

ADMISSION FEES FOR NON-MEMBERS

Adults Si; Children (6-17), 50¢; Senior Citizens, 25¢. Admission is free on Mondays.

Single copies of Chicago History, published quarterly, are 2.25 by mail; S2 at newsstands, bookshops, and the Museum Store.

Poster issued ca. 1883 by the Wabash , St. Louis & Pacific Railway Co. Now on exhibit, see page 119. CHS.

·ROUTE· - ~ rporn

~;TArilfJ/;

The NEW WABASH DEPOT at CHICAGO O '

c~~"{RALL y LOC.4 .,.~o

0

LY

POLK STREET, IN THE HEART THREE BLOCKS FROM THE

BETWEEN

Clark and Stale.

()~

POST OFFICE.

°rHE C't

Other Railway Depots,all Prominent Hotels,and all Places of Public Interest within Easy Reach Are you going TO Chicago? ) Are you going THROUGH Chicago?

Are you go~g FROM Chicago? )