University of Virginia Library

VI. Men Who Built the University

We know the mind that conceived the plan of that
noble group of buildings, and the hand which platted that
plan, and drew up its vital specifications. Who were the
men who actually laid the foundations, raised the walls,
set the roofs, and decorated the entablatures? We have
already mentioned the names of the contractors employed
by the Visitors of Central College, and Spooner's
letter, from which we have quoted, gives the names of
most of those who were engaged in the work of construction
after the University had been incorporated. Each
pavilion in Jefferson's scheme represented in his view a
separate school. It is significant that the amount which,
according to his estimate, each would cost was precisely
the same as that which, by his calculation, would be required
to erect each of the district colleges called for in
his famous scheme for popular education. In a very

definite sense, he looked upon each of the University
schools as a distinct institution, not unlike the projected
academies, and, therefore, the man who built one of these
pavilions, which typified in brick and mortar a single
school, was entitled to as much credit as if he had erected
the main structure of a district college.

Starting with the pavilion situated at the northern end
of West Lawn, we find that the bricks used in its construction
were laid by Phillips and Carter, of Richmond,
whilst its woodwork was from the hand of James Oldham.
The brickwork of the second pavilion, on the
same side of the Lawn, was from the hand of Matthew
Brown; the woodwork from that of James Dinsmore.
The contractor for the brickwork of the third pavilion
was John M. Perry, and for the woodwork, Perry and
Dinsmore; for the brickwork of the fourth pavilion,
Matthew Brown, David Knight, and Hugh Chisholm,
and for the woodwork, John M. Perry. Carter and
Phillips furnished the brickwork for the fifth pavilion—
at the south end of West Lawn,—and George W.
Spooner the woodwork. At least three of the pavilions
situated on the East Lawn, beginning at the northern end,
were erected by Richard Ware. The woodwork for the
fourth pavilion seems to have been from the hand of
James Dinsmore. The hotels, A, B, C, D, E, and F,
were built by Perry, Spooner, Nelson Barksdale, Curtis
Carter, William Phillips and A. B. Thorn. Perry alone
had a share in the construction of all the hotels except
Hotel D. The contractors for the numerous dormitories
were the same men as the contractors for the pavilions
and hotels. The bricks for the serpentine walls were
furnished by Perry, Phillips, and Carter; the tin for all the
houses by A. H. Brooks.[9]

We have already referred briefly to the history of John
M. Perry. He not only conveyed to the College and the
University almost the entire area of ground on which the
group of buildings now stands, but he also had a more extensive
part in their erection, as a whole, than any other
person employed in the work. Spooner, who was associated
with him in his carpentry, appears first under contract
to General Cocke at Bremo, where he was a colaborer
with Neilson, afterwards a partner of Dinsmore
in the construction of the Rotunda. He remained at
the University during many years engaged in making the
repairs which were soon constantly required; and he was
so much respected there, that, during a short interval,
he filled the responsible office of proctor. Curtis Carter
and William Phillips were brickmakers in business in
Richmond. The famous Brockenbrough House, afterwards
the White House of the Confederacy, was a monument
of Carter's mechanical skill; and he had manufactured
most of the material used in the thick walls of
the handsome banks of that city in those times. This
firm, responding to the advertisement inserted in the
Enquirer by the proctor in the spring of 1819, sent in a
bid to supply one million bricks for the use of the University,
which was an indication of the great scale of their
operations.

Alexander Garrett, a shrewd and competent judge, and
as bursar in a good position to compare the skill of the
different contractors, pronounced the work of Richard
Ware to be superior to that of all the others. Ware
resided in Philadelphia, where he had built several of
the most imposing public and private edifices adorning
that cultivated city. He had seen the advertisement,—
which had appeared in the journals there,—for the
erection of the University pavilions and dormitories,

and had visited Charlottesville at once to offer his bid in
person; and Jefferson had accepted that bid on the condition
of his procuring his brickmakers and bricklayers
from the North. It was perhaps due largely to them,
and to the superior opportunities for training that had
been open to them there, that the work with which Ware
was credited, received such warm encomiums.

Subordinate to the contractors, there were at least
three stonecutters who deserve some notice: John Gorman
and Michael and Giacomo Raggi. Our first view
of Gorman is in Lynchburg, where, before he was induced
to come to the University by Jefferson, he had been
employed in a large marble quarry. Having been heartily
recommended by Christopher Anthony, a highly
esteemed citizen of that town, he was engaged to chisel
the Tuscan capitals and bases; and was also expected to
do all kinds of stonework that might be required, such
as keystones, and window and door sills. He seems to
have hacked into shape most of those needed for the
hotels and dormitories. He was paid in accord with a
tri-monthly measurement; and the fact that one-half of
the amount due him at the end of each interval was always
held back for six months, would seem to prove that
he was not entirely reliable, and, for that reason, had to
be subjected to a check of some sort.

The Raggis were Italian brothers who had been imported
in accord with the advice of Jefferson. The first
intimation that he gave of his intention to pursue his
architectural scheme on a more ambitious scale than was
reflected in the first pavilion, was his request for authority
from the Board of Visitors to bring in a stonecutter
who had been trained in his art in Italy. Micheli and
Giacomo Raggi were procured through the offices of

Thomas Appleton, the American consul at Leghorn.
They arrived in Baltimore in June, 1819. They proved
to be expensive from the very start: it was necessary to
advance them a large sum of money before they sailed;
and this was swelled by another draft on the bursar to
pay the cost of the journey from Maryland to Virginia.
The stone which they were called upon, after their arrival,
to chisel, had nothing in common with their native marbles;
and this was perhaps one reason why Micheli, at
least, showed almost at once a lazy callousness to the requirements
of his contract. Previous to July 16, some
test of their abilities had been made, for writing on that
day to the proctor, Jefferson said, "If Mr. Micheli
should be sufficiently advanced in his carving of a capital
to judge of its success by to-morrow morning, I would
ride up in the morning to see it." One month afterwards,
Spooner, in a letter to Brockenbrough, then absent
in Richmond, remarked rather pointedly that the "Italians
are going on at the same gait, earning fifty cents a
day." Their services, in the end, promised to be so unprofitable,
owing primarily to the unfit nature of the
stone which they had to work in, that, in September, 1820,
the committee of superintendence decided to release them
both, although the contract of one had still to run for
eighteen months and of the other, for twenty. Giacomo
had given only fourteen months of labor; Micheli, only
twelve; and on that ground, the committee refused to pay
the sum that would be due for their homeward passage.
Although Micheli Raggi, the least industrious and trustworthy
of the two, had been in the University's employment
for twelve months, he had been the cause of an expenditure
on his account of $1,390.56. Giacomo Raggi
did not accompany his brother to Italy; or if he did, he had
returned to Charlottesville by November 22, 1821, for,
by that date, the outlay for his board and lodging had
again become a charge on the funds of the University.[10]