 |
Chapter 4
The Building Campaign of 1819, Part 2
Documentary History of the Construction of the Buildings at the University
of Virginia, 1817-1828 |  |
Chapter 4
The Building Campaign of 1819, Part 2
period of hidden gestation. They do not arise out of sudden and superficial
demands that come from the outside; they are rather the mature working out of
inner convictions and beliefs that the artist has long held, has mulled over, has
perhaps sought to embody in preliminary essays. In short, the artist must live
with his form, so that it becomes flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone, before
he can start it on its independent career.
—Lewis Mumford[265]
Design Change
During the spring and summer the building did move forward on a couple major fronts, but
not before the development of what in retrospect appears to have been one radical change in
Jefferson's design for the university. As the Central College Board of Visitors' last meeting
in late February broke up, Cabell fortunately compelled Jefferson to consider the propriety
of turning the backs of the buildings on the backstreets to the backs of the lawn buildings,
thus keeping the fronts of all the buildings from facing the rear of someone else's living
quarters.[266] But that fortunate turn of affairs did not temper David Watson's extreme
dissatisfaction with the design. Although his term as visitor had ended, Watson in the week
following the Central College visitors' final meeting felt compelled to vent his frustrations in
a letter to General Cocke, who would continue as a visitor and who shared Watson's
uneasiness about Jefferson's design.[267] When it finally dawned upon the members of the
board what disagreement they had in common about the design of the university it became
only a matter of time before some action followed. The minutes of the meeting of the new
Board of Visitors for the university in late March are silent about the university's design but
it likely that while together at least some of the visitors began to act in concert to alter the
plan.[268] Senator Cabell wrote General Cocke in mid-April to inform him that fellow visitor
James Breckenridge "entirely concurs with us as to the propriety of stopping the plan of
dormitories at the houses of instruction, & with respect to the size of the Lecturing Rooms,
& the flat roofs."
The visitors' main disagreement with Jefferson's plan centered around the buildings' sizes,
considered much too small, and Jefferson's desire to use flat roofs for the sake of
architectural purity. General Breckenridge, who applauded a proposed "change in respect to
the gardens," said that new visitor Chapman Johnson concurred with them on the main
points; and Cabell conjectured, "& I doubt not Genl. Taylor wd. also." Cabell and
Breckenridge decided to write Jefferson separately to state their objections and suggest that
the buildings be enlarged but left changes in the dormitories to be handled by their
collaborator on the committee of superintendence. "We should move in concert or we shall
perplex & disgust the old Sachem," Cabell schemed, ". . . I think we have matters in a pretty
fair way."[269]
Cabell wrote to the "old Sachem" two days later:
separated: some thought have occurred to me which I beg leave to communicate
to you with the freedom of a friend. The plan of pavilions and dormitories along
the area of the University will be beautiful & magnificent, and unlike any thing
which I have seen in Europe or America. The continuation of the same style of
architecture till the two sides of the Area shall have been filled up, will follow
as a matter of course. But permit me to suggest a doubt whether the plan of
Pavilions & dormitories should not be confined to the Area, and some other
style adopted for the Hotels & back ranges.[270]
and only one window each, coupled with an "eastern & western Aspect," would overheat
during the summer. Also, according to the prevailing opinion of the "best workmen in the
Country," flat roofs could not be made leakproof and thus would require "renewal" in only
six years.[271] Moreover, the "contiguous public passage" that the doors of the dormitories
opened into confined the students to an environment "less retired from noise and other
interruptions, than might be desired." As for the "Lecturing rooms" of the pavilions not yet
started, Cabell favored the adoption of a "more spacious plan." He was attracted to the
post-Revolutionary French "model of the Greek & Roman theatres & amphitheatres" but
realized that type of construction would deprive the professors and their families of the use
of the rooms otherwise than for lectures.[272] Cabell did approve of the decision by the
committee of superintendence, which General Cocke had informed him of, to annex the
gardens to the back yards of the pavilions. As he closed his letter Cabell excused the
suggestions he now ventured to make on the basis that he was "mainly governed by the wish
to remove every possible ground of objection to the further patronage of the Assembly." He
also cautioned that the visitors should guard against communicating to the public "any little
differences of opinion which now & then may occur among them, so as to prevent
unfounded inferences from being deduced." But to one another each visitor, Cabell added,
ought to "think & speak freely his impressions upon every point, and I am well persuaded
that a contrary course ought & would be regarded by you as uncandid & unfriendly."
266. Jefferson alluded to Cabell's complaint and the visitors' mounting discord in his letter
to James Breckenridge, Robert B. Taylor, James Madison, and Chapman Johnson of 8-26
July 1819, located in ViU:TJ.
267. See Watson to John Hartwell Cocke, 8 March 1819, in ViU:JHC. While Watson's
complaints apparently did not lead directly to any changes at the university, they are fairly
indicative of the fact that as a group the other visitors lacked a full agreement with
Jefferson's overall plan. Watson's unflattering portrait of the university should not be
understimated, however, because although he was now no longer a visitor, he was a member
of the House of Delegates, where the battle for the university's purse strings eventually
would be waged, and he still could exert some influence. His letter to Cocke, who already
agreed with many of Watson's complaints, may have served as an impetus for Cocke to
finally take decisive action to alter the design more to his own liking.
268. See the Minutes of the Board of Visitors of the University of Virginia, 29 March 1819,
in PPAmP:UVA Minutes.
270. Cabell to TJ, 17 April 1819, ViU:TJ; see also Cabell, Early History of the University of
Virginia, 174-76. When publishing this letter in 1856, Nathaniel F. Cabell wrote that his
uncle "Mr. Cabell was wont to relate several pleasant anecdotes--better suited to a social
circle than to a permanent record here--relative to the dissent of the other Visitors, not only
from the plan of the buildings, but other novel and cherished ideas of the author; to the
respectful manner in which their counter-opinions were conveyed to the venerable rector,
and to the adroitness with which they were met. Their motives for general acquiescence are
well stated by his biographer, Mr. Tucker. Though every essential part of the establishment
required the sanction of the Board of Visitors, yet, on almost all occasions, they yielded to
his views, partly from the unaffected deference which most of the Board had for his
judgment and experience, and partly for the reason often urged by Mr. Madison, that as the
scheme was originally Mr. Jefferson's, and the chief responsibility for its success or failure
would fall on him, it was but fair to let him execute it in his own way. They doubted, also,
concerning one or more features of its organization, and certain principles on which it was
proposed to conduct its government. These they knew would be tested by time and trial, and
errors, when manifested, could be corrected by their successors" (ibid., 174).
271. Cabell's concerns about flat roofs echoes former visitor David Watson's statement that
"I fear too that the flat roofs will leak, for I scarcely ever knew a flat roof in Virginia that did
not" (Watson to Cocke, 8 March 1819, ViU:JHC).
272. "My idea of the Greek & Roman & French plan of oval rooms & seats rising one above
the other for an area, Col: [Wilson Cary] Nicholas thinks would be objectionable in
this--that they would render the rooms useless for the accomodaton of the Professors at
other hours than those of Lecturing. I had not foreseen this objection" (Cabell to Cocke, 15
April 1819, ViU:JCC).
Alternative Design
General John Hartwell Cocke of Bremo, Jefferson's partner on the committee of
superintendence, did freely express his impressions about the proposed design, after waiting
long enough for Cabell's letter to arrive at Monticello, which it did on 1 May. Like Cabell,
Cocke recognized the futility of trying to alter the design of the pavilions and dormitories
upon the "upper level" of the square.[273] "The beauty & convenience of this part of the plan
more than counterbalances some objections which present themselves to my mind," Cocke
conceded to Jefferson. Indeed, he thought, no change for the better could be enacted unless
the "low pitched roofs concealed by a railing (upon the plan I once suggested) shou'd be
found to be better & more œconomical coverings & to render the rooms more comfortable
by keeping the Sun at a greater distance from the ceilings." Cocke enclosed his own
architectural scheme for the back streets for Jefferson's perusal, insinuating that his plan
might be less expensive and allow for a "more retired situation" of the student apartments,
their "less exposes to the influence of the Sun, may recommend it for adoption—
notwithstanding the sacrifice it demands in Architectural beauty."[274] It combined a hotel
and sixteen dormitories under one roof, at once eliminating the difficulty of flat roofs and
providing more space for gardens, still considered too small by all the visitors. In typical
Jefferson fashion, Cocke even calculated the number of requiste bricks for his building
—239,700—as compared to 389,100 for Jefferson's individual dormitory rooms. "I am
aware," Cocke concluded, "that the elevation of the plan now suggested, the appearance of
the Chimneys and the roof will be offensive to your cultivated taste but perhaps you may
think of some stile of finishing with parapet walls at the ends & balustrades between the
Chimneys (as are awkwardly represented in the sketch) that will so far cover its deformity
as to render it admissible upon the score of œconomy & comfort."[275]
Cocke's plan, predictably, failed in its desired effect upon the rector. Jefferson could not
concede to Cocke's proposal to "unite the hotels and dormitories in massive buildings of 2.
or 3. stories high," thus wrecking his architectural unity. However, Cocke's letter, following
so closely on Cabell's earnest plea, did cause Jefferson to recognize the seriousness of the
visitors' opposition to his design as it now stood. And when Jefferson and Cocke met at the
construction site on 12 May to discuss the matter, accompanied by Alexander Garrett, the
committee of superintendence, in the bursar's words, ended their meeting by having to
"decline building the hotel as first contemplated and in lieu thereof build pavilions, and
Dormatories, on the opposite side of the lawn, that is to say directly opposite those already
built, this arose from the difference of opinion between them relative to the plan of the
hotel."[276] At their parting the two men wisely decided to "reserve the question" about
altering the plan of the hotels and domitories for the visitors at their next meeting.[277]
273. By "upper level" Cocke means the Lawn, as contrasted to the eastern and western
ranges. See the Board of Visitors Minutes, 29 November 1821.
274. For Cocke's sketches, which Frederick Doveton Nichols suggested might be the four
drawings of dormitories in ViU:TJ by an unidentified draftsman, see Nichols, Thomas
Jefferson's Architectural Drawings, nos. 374, 375, 376, and 377). Brockenbrough requested
the drawings from Jefferson in early June along with Jefferson's study of Hotel A, which is
also missing (see Brockenbreough to TJ, 7 June 1819, in CSmH:TJ). Lasala includes those
drawings in his thesis, but does not attribute them to Cocke (see #19-08, #19-09, #19-10,
#19-11, and #19-12 in Lasala, "Thomas Jefferson's Designs for the University of Virginia").
277. TJ to Brockenbrough, 17 May 1819, ViU:PP. Brockenbrough had laid off the grounds
in preparation for construction to begin while at the site in April.
Efforts Redirected
The decision to postpone executing the row of buildings on the backstreet meant that
Jefferson had to make the architectural drawings for the buildings of the east lawn. Jefferson
informed Brockenbrough on 5 June that he had not begun to prepare the plans, "nor shall I
be at leisure to turn to that business till the week after the ensuing one."[278] In the
meantime, Jefferson told the proctor, the laborers could dig the foundations according to the
dimensions of pavilions "No. I. II. III. of the Western range . . . the trimming them to what
shall be the eact size of each will be trifling." The foundations for the dormitories too, of
both ranges, could be dug. But as altering the terms and manner of the contracts already
made with the workmen, "I leave it entirely to yourself."[279]
Jefferson waited until 8 July to inform the other four visitors that the committee of
superintendence substituted the building of three pavilions on the east lawn, with their
"appurtenant dormitories," in place of the hotels and dormitories originally scheduled to be
built. As for Cocke's plan of uniting hotels and dormitories under one shed, the rector
shrewdly diverted attention away from the reasons favoring it by declaring that the
"separation of the students in different and unconnected rooms, by two's and two's, seems a
fundamental of the plan. it was adopted by the first visitors of the Central college, stated by
them in their original report to the Governor as their patron, and by him laid before the
legislature; it was approved and reported by the Commissioners of Rockfish gap to the
legislature; of their opinion indeed we have no other evidence than their acting on it without
directing a change." Jefferson also reminded the visitors of Cabell's wish to alter the layout
of the buildings on the ground plan of the university by placing the gardens of the professors
adjacent to the rear of their pavilions:
thought insuperable to wit, that of the approach of carriages, wood-carts Etc. to
the back of the buildings. mr Cabell's desire however appeared so strong, and
the object of it so proper, that, after separation, I undertook to examine & try
whether it could not be accomplished; and was happy to find it practicable, by a
change which was approved by Genl. Cocke, and since by mr Cabell who has
been lately with me. I think it a real improvement, and the greater, as by
throwing the Hotels and additional dormitories on a back street, it forms in fact
the commencement of a regular town, capable of being enlarged to any extent
which future circumstances may call for.[280]
278. TJ apparently completed all the drawings for the pavilions of the east lawn by the end
of June (see TJ to ASB, 27 June; see also the description of #02-01 in Lasala, "Thomas
Jefferson's Designs for the University of Virginia").
280. TJ to James Breckenridge, Robert B. Taylor, James Madison, and Chapman Johnson,
8-26 July 1819, ViU:TJ. For a discussion of the effects on Jefferson's architectural drawings
by his adaptation of Cabell's suggestion, see Lasala's descriptions of #00-13, #00-14,
#00-15, and #00-16 in "Thomas Jefferson's Designs for the University of Virginia." Robert
B. Taylor, already informed by Senator Cabell of the alteration of the ground plan, told
Jefferson on 27 July that in writing to him "You have imposed on yourself, Sir, a very
unnecessary trouble, as I shoud have adopted, with entire satisfaction, whatever measures
you judgment & experience led you to pursue" (DLC:TJ).
Workmen's Progress
Changes in Jefferson's design, of course, would have long-term implications for the physical
layout and characteristics of the lawn and ranges but for the most part did not effect the
immediate practical considerations of the actual contractors involved. James Dinsmore and
John Perry, in addition to carrying on the building that they had contracted for with the
Central College, began taking on new responsibilities, and two other contractors, James
Oldham and Richard Ware, began work on their pavilions, hotels, and dormitories. The
foundation for Perry's new building was delayed until mid-August, when he was scheduled
to "commence as soon as they have succeeded in blowing a rock which has impeaded there
progress in diging his foundation."[281] Perry, however, besides working on the buildings he
contracted for earlier, kept busy supervising brickmaking and cutting lumber at his sawmill.
Dinsmore did spend time in mid-May laying off the grounds for the new pavilion and its
adjacent dormitories on the eastern side of the lawn following the previously discussed
meeting of the committee of superintendence on 11 May. He agreed to lay off the grounds
along the new plan for the eastern side of the square so that the proctor would not have to
return so soon from Richmond since the "hands now engaged diging out the foundation for
the 2. buildings on the West of the lawn, would be idle after those are compleated."[282] By
early June Dinsmore was back at work on Pavilion II, and the proctor, making a visit to the
Academical Village for a few days, submitted an alternate second floor plan for the building
that "saves the running of the 2nd staircase immediately before the front door."[283]
Jefferson acknowledged that the two staircases "is a very exceptionable thing. but the
changes proposed to avoid it appear to me to produce greater disadvantages."[284] Early
August found Dinsmore putting up the "Modellians on the Cornice of his Pavillian"[285] and
by mid-August he was calling for stone door sills, so George W. Spooner, Jr., finding it
impractical to procure them from the "presant Quarry without the assistance of a man
aquainted with blowing," went hunting for stone that could be more readily procured and
discovered a number of "well shapen Blocks that will answer the purpose" on William D.
Meriwether's land, about three-fourths of a mile "farther than the presant" quarry.[286]
The enterprising James Oldham, a most superior woodworker, immediately set to work on
Pavilion I and by the middle of June was anxiously seeking quality lumber from which to
fashion his window sashes. The building's ornamental "Ordre Dorique" entablature was
inspired by Charles Errard and Roland Fréart de Chambray's beautiful depiction of the Baths
of Diocletian in Parallele de l'Architecture Antique avec la Moderne (1650; Paris
1766).[287] On 21 June Oldham wrote to the master of Monticello with questions about the
pavilion and sent his old employer
diocletion, baths, chambray is not in the Book of Palladio which I have, and I
must aske the faver of Mr. Jefferson to lone me the book to lay down my
cornice and I will immediately return it safe. I will be thankefull for instructions
as respects the ceiling of the Portico which I have to do, those that are now
finishing I discover are calculated for the ceilings to finish close down on the
Top of the Cap of the Column, this kinde of finish it appears to me will have an
Aucword affect, but if the ceiling is resest and the Architrave of the cornice is
returnd on the inside of the Portico it will make a meteriall change in the
appearance of the Columns, and will come something neare the rule lade down
by Palladio for finishing of Porticoes. Our Proctor is not heare, he gave me no
positive instructions as to the manner of finish but referred to those that were
going on. it is nesary for the Scantling to be made sutable for the finish.[288]
"Making his Frames & we shall be ready for his floor of Joists in the course of
tomorrow."[289] Oldham had only one helper, however, and a few days later Spooner urged
Brockenbrough to send some "hands" to Oldham as soon as possible, "as I am affraid the
bricklayers will be delayd on his building, for they are really ready for his Joists."[290]
282. Garrett to Brockenbrough, 12 May 1819, ViU:PP. Cocke wanted to unite the hotels and
dormitories in "massive buildings of 2. or 3. stories high," a proposal Jefferson could not
concede to. See TJ to James Breckenridge, Robert B. Taylor, James Madison, and Chapman
Johnson, 8-26 July 1818, in ViU:TJ, and appendix E.
284. TJ to Brockenbrough, 27 June 1819, ViU:PP. The proctor's design has not been
identified (see in Lasala, "Thomas Jefferson's Designs for the University of Virginia,"
#03-03).
287. Jefferson owned the 1766 edition, edited by the French printer and publisher Charles
Antoine Jombert (1712-1784). See #4216 in Sowerby, Catalogue of the Library of Thomas
Jefferson, 4:380.
288. Oldham to TJ, 21 June 1819, ViU:TJ. Lasala speculates that Oldham's draught was an
unidentified drawing or drawings that might be copies of an architrave detail from Palladio
(see the description of #19-15 in Lasala, "Thomas Jefferson's Designs for the University of
Virginia").
Lumber Hauled
The pace of Dinsmore's, Oldham's, and Ware's work is best glimpsed by examining the
amount of materials delivered to the university for them. From 14 April to 29 May, John
Pollock, who ran his own small sawmill, hauled a dozen wagon loads of plank from
Gilmore's, Garth's, and Maury's sawmills to Dinsmore's buildings.[291] In addition he carted
two wagon loads of tin from the Milton Ferry on the Rivanna River to the university. The
typical charge for hauling a load of plank was $6.67, and Pollock earned a total of $76.20
for delivering the 14 wagon loads of material.[292] Pollock received $20 for 4 days worth of
"Hawling plank from Opie Lindsays" to Dinsmore later in the summer.[293] On 8 May
Pollock also began hauling for the Dinsmore & Perry partnership, which he continued to do
through 9 July. Nine wagon loads from Humphrey's and Flanagan's sawmills at $7.50 each
earned Pollock $67.50 from Dinsmore & Perry.[294] William D. Meriwether, one of the
directors of the Rivanna Company, delivered 2,424 feet of 1½ inch plank to "Pavillion No
111" on the West Lawn for Dinsmore & Perry in late summer, getting $72.72 in return for
his trouble.[295]
So much lumber was required at the university, in fact, that in mid-May Brockenbrough
requested Alexander Garrett to advertise locally for the material, which the bursar
immediately did, although he feared that no proposals would materialize.[296] After a month
William Wood finally offered to furnish well-seasoned plank and "any scantling, & of any
length you may want, upon as good terms as you can get it of others." The rub was that he
would not deliver any before October.[297] And in July a Mr. Gentry also handed in an offer
to "contract for a large quantity" but nothing apparently came of that proposal either.[298]
The situation so frustrated James Oldham that he
have all my large timber hewn this weake, if Capt. Wm. D. Meriwether does
not disappoint me in the Scantling he ingaged to cut I think I shall be able to all
my timber in suffitien Time, he informs me the logs are redy but the water is
two low to worke his mill, and I am fearefull he will faile in his ingagement, if
you could do me the favor to ingage me a pare of Sawyers I have no doubt but I
could prepare a Suffitiency of Scantling in time as the worke progresses; when
you was heare I mentioned to you that I had ritten . . . for a pare of Sawyers. . . .
on monday last I made an inga[g]ement of 7 or 8 thousand feet of lumber 10
miles distant, the quality I have no doubt you will be satisfyed with.[299]
Michie, for $146.57½.[300] Before the Virginia summer heat even began to fade Oldham
purchased another 14,957 feet of scantling from Meriwether, for use on Pavilion I and its
adjacent dormitories for $673.06, and a month later bought from Jesse Garth 1,898 feet
more for the same buildings, at a cost of $28.97½.[301]
Richard Ware received his share of lumber too, although it was August by the time Robert
Lindsay "Halled" the first wagon load. Lindsay, between 7 and 25 August, delivered at least
14 wagon loads of plank to the Philadelphian working on the east side of Jefferson's square
—nearly 13,000 feet—at a cost of $392.33.[302] George W. Spooner, Jr., complained to the
proctor that William D. Meriwether was furnishing lumber to Oldham at $4.50 delivered at
the university, exceeding "fifty Cents the Hundred the differance in price" that Ware paid to
Nelson Barksdale. Ware "can better explain the nature of his arrangment," said Spooner,
although Meriwether was willing to furnish the "timbers for a nother building on the same
terms all but the heart Inch & half plank."[303] A week later, however, the fickle Spooner had
changed his mind, saying that "I am since induced to think otherwise as the Heart Plank
agreed for, Mr Mere's will not engage to get which makes the other preferable."[304] John
Bishop, who served in the Albemarle County militia with James Dinsmore and Alexander
Garrett during the War of 1812,[305] hauled lumber to Ware for 12¼ days between 16
August and 6 September, receiving $61.25 in compensation.[306] In September Ware
authorized the proctor to give James Stone an advance of $10 for hauling timber from his
sawmill to Ware's buildings because "the beairer has left his Wagon Wheel many Miles from
here to be Repaired & can not get it without A little mony."[307] A couple days later Ware
wrote Brockenbrough again, requesting that a $40 order be drawn for George Milliway who
had hauled 8 days at $5 per day, "he Stats to me he can get the Money for the Same of A
friend of his in Charlottesville."[308] Richard Ware also had the privilege of purchasing the
last bit of plank for the entire year just a week before Christmas from former Proctor
Barksdale, some $1,383.51 worth of "Scantling & Hart plank delivered for Pavelian N. 1. N
2 and four Dormatarys betwen Pavelians & joist for Six dormatarys South of Pavelian No 2
E. Range."[309]
291. These three mills were in Albemarle County. Gilmore's may be Gilmers Mill on Buck
Island Creek which was operated by George C. Gilmer in the mid-nineteenth century and
razed after 1907. Garths Mill on Ivy Creek is sometimes called Gaths Mill. Reuben Maury's
mill, been built around 1810 and run by John Wheeler in 1814, was located on Moores
Creek at Frys Spring. The enterprising university contractor John Perry became Maury's
partner in 1819. See DNA: Records of the Bureau of Census, Manufactures of
Fredericksville Parish, Albemarle County, 1820.
299. Oldham to Brockenbrough, 20 June 1819, ViU:PP. William D. Meriwether delivered
3,140 feet of "1 Inch bordes and thirty feet of Scantling" to Oldham on 20 May, costing
$59.45 (Loose Receipts, 6 and 12 July 1819, ViU:PP).
300. See Jonathan Michie Account with James Oldham, 17 July, and Loose Receipts, 29
September 1819, in ViU:PP.
301. William D. Meriwether to James Oldham, Invoice for Scantling, 18 September, and
Jesse Garth, Account with James Oldham, 15 October 1819, ViU:PP.
306. John Bishop, Account with Richard Ware, 16 August to 6 September 1819, ViU:PP.
John Bishop apparently operated a sawmill with his brother, Joseph (see DNA: Records of
the Bureau of Census, Manufactures of Fredericksville Parish, Albemarle County, 1820).
307. Ware to Brockenbrough, 22 September 1819, ViU:PP. James Stone operated a sawmill
in Albemarle County (see DNA: Records of the Bureau of Census, Manufactures of
Fredericksville Parish, Albemarle County, 1820).
Local Merchants
As for other progress at the site, merchant accounts probably reveal who was making the
best show. The Central College had purchased all of its iron-mongery and many other goods
from hardware merchant James Leitch of Charlottesville. Leitch of course was content to
continue the arrangement with the newly designated University of Virginia. But in May
1819 local merchants, sensing quite correctly that there was real money to made off the
buildings that were beginning to rise on the former farm one mile to the west, expressed
dissatisfaction at Leitch's "exclusive privilege" of furnishing the "Iron mongary &c."[310]
John Winn & Co. delayed submitting a proposal because its proprietor, John Winn, who
along with Leitch had served on a committee appointed to view sites for the Albemarle
Academy in 1814,[311] was away on business in Richmond, but the company did eventually
get its share of business.[312] Area merchant firm Bramham & Jones agreed to furnish "such
Merchandise as may be wanting for the use of said buildings at ten per cent On the Costs,
and Charges of getting the Materials to Charlottesville."[313] The bursar advised the proctor
to contract in the capital city if it was "much better for the institution," but Richmond firms
did not play a significant role in furnishing material for the building of the university until
August, right before Brockenbrough's removal from Richmond to the university site.[314]
310. The bursar requested local merchants to submit proposals for "furnishing the
University" (Alexander Garrett to Brockenbrough, 17 May 1819, ViU:PP).
311. See Peter Carr to TJ, 14 August 1814, in ViU:Carr-Cary Papers. Winn also served in
the county militia during the War of 1812. See List of Militia Subscriptions, 1812,
ViU:Maury Papers.
312. For example, John Winn & Co. arranged for the purchase and shipping of $894.68
worth of sheet iron from Baltimore in September, which apparently arrived at the university
by the beginning of November. See John M. Perry to Brockenbrough, 4 September 1819,
ViU:PP.
313. Bramham & Jones, Proposal, 16 May 1819, ViU:PP. John Winn and Horace Bramham
served on a committee that arranged a July 4th celebration in 1823 which Jefferson declined
to attend because of "age and debility" (see TJ to John Winn, William C. Rives, Daniel M.
Railey, John M. Railey, John Ormond, Horace Bramham, and George W. Nicholas, 25 June
1823, in Ford, Jefferson Correspondence, 10:276-77.
Richmond Firms
Brockenbrough & Harvie, the first Richmond enterprise that the proctor appealed to,
shipped the university seven casks of nails weighing 1,430 pounds on 7 August and another
seven casks on 16 August. Altogether the two shipments, which included 8, 10, 12, 16, 24,
and 30 penny nails as well as number 6, 10, and 12 brads, represented $225.14 worth of
nails plus the $1.25 per hundred shipping costs that wagoner James Guthrie collected for
transporting the material. Guthrie, by the way, carried some beds and a dozen chairs to the
construction site for the proctor, who was anticipating his family's move.[315] From its initial
August shipment through June 1821, Brockenbrough & Harvie shipped $1,011.02 worth of
assorted nails to the university's carpenters (although only one other shipment was made in
1819, $26.39 worth in October).[316]
John Van Lew & Co. was probably the biggest Richmond firm to supply the early University
of Virginia with materials. On 9 August Brockenbrough purchased 24 dozen brass sash
pulleys for $39 from the company after James Oldham requested for his buildings 8 dozen
"Window Pullyes and the Screws for them, theare is none at Leitches."[317] Additionally, the
proctor spent another $38.34 for 25 gross of assorted screws and over 30,000 sprigs ranging
from ½ to 2 inches in size.[318] John M. Perry needed "Some locks and common but hinges
& Screws" and "5 boxes Boston Crown Glass 10 x 12" for his buildings that could not be
found locally,[319] and the firm obligingly shipped the 515 pounds of material to
Charlottesville via wagoner Andrew Jamison, who earned $7.72 for the four day trip.[320]
The glass turned up "somewhat broken," however, and Van Lew suggested that it "perhaps
may have been roughly handled by the Waggoner," who also had delivered "And Irons &
Candlestick" for the proctor's own use.[321] John Pollock, the wagoner who spent the spring
and summer hauling plank from the sawmills to the construction site, also hauled iron from
Richmond that the university purchased from John Van Lew & Co.[322] By July 1820, when
the firm handed in its account with Richard Morris's statement that "We are very needy, We
shall be pleased to receive the amount as soon as convenient," John van Lew & Co. had
shipped $1,448.50 worth of hardware, tools, and other building materials to the university.
Items the account lists include nails, screws, brads, locks, pulleys, hinges, glass, glue, tin
plate, sheet lead, sheet iron, tar, sandpaper, rope, cord, a dozen plane irons, 6 files and a
rasp, 4 hammers, 2 bells, a ripper, a bellows, an anvil, a vice, and a plow, plus sacks of salt,
4 barrels of herring and one of shad, and a charge for placing an advertisement for a
quarryman.[323]
315. Brockenbrough to Garrett, 2 August, and Brockenbrough & Harvie, Invoice for Nails,
2-16 August 1819, ViU:PP. When the first shipment arrived on 6 August contractor John
Perry wrote beneath the proctor's letter that "I have received the articles expressed in the
above note but had No money to pay. I wish verry much to See you here on business that
Cannot be done to well any where else." Guthrie later hauled more nails and other hardware
to the university for the Richmond firm of John Van Lew & Co. See Loose Receipt, 27
October, 14 and 18 November 1820, in ViU:PP.
316. Brockenbrough & Harvie, Account with the University of Virginia, 2 August 1819 to 2
June 1821, ViU:PP.
317. Oldham to Brockenbrough, 1 August 1819, ViU:PP. Oldham previously had notified
the proctor that John Perry "has disappointed me in my window silns and I have to looke for
them from some other qurter . . . I Shall soon want a little asortment of Nails, brads, &
sprigs for my window frames; the Planke kiln is not yet compleated" (Oldham to
Brockenbrough, 20 June 1819, ViU:PP).
320. John Van Lew & Co. to Brockenbrough, 8-9 September, and Loose Receipt, 12
September, in ViU:PP. The glass cost $90 and the hinges and screws $15.25. See John Van
Lew & Co. to Brockenbrough, 1-24 September 1819, in ViU:PP.
323. John Van Lew & Co., Account with the University of Virginia, 9 August 1819 to 27
July 1820, ViU:PP.
Out-of-State Sources
The only out-of-state firm that seems to have furnished materials directly to the university in
1819 was P. A. Sabbaton of New York City, who previously had supplied Brockenbrough
with the "Gate Post's for the Governor's Square" in Richmond. Brockenbrough wrote
Sabbaton seeking information about sash weights for James Dinsmore, who later sent a
memorandum to the proctor containing his own prices for having them made.[324] Sabbaton
wrote back to Brockenbrough on 4 June to inform him that weights "Such as are made use
of in Virginia, (with a pully in them) they will cost You 4½ cents" per pound, or "if you use
Such as are made use of here, that is made round about from 1 to 2 inches diameter, having
a hole in One end, or a wire to receive the cord, they can be afforded for 4 cents" a pound.
He instructed the proctor to include the "weight & Size of each, & the length they ought be"
when ordering, and recommended "an Article generally made use off here to prevent the
Chimney from Smoking, and preserve the fire Place, they last almost as long as the House,
and look very neat, 2 Jambs and a back come at 12 Dollars, we can make them at any time,
to any Size."[325] On Christmas eve Sabbaton made out a bill for two hundred window
weights that he had placed on board a ship for Bernard Peyton on 15 November.[326] The
eight and nine pound sash weights, at the 4¼ cents per pound rate for 1,764 pounds, cost
$79.38 (plus $1 for "Carting On board"). Sabbaton also offered "franklins much handsomer
that those I Saw at Mr. Peyton—for 20$ each—& I beleive are somewhat larger—There is
also a Grate & false Back to be put in occasionally to burn Coal, or even wood, but that
makes them come 2$ higher."[327]
Another out-of-state firm, the Boston Glass Manufactory on Essex Street in Boston, did
provide glass for the university through their Richmond agent, Smith & Riddle, a firm that
collapsed in May 1819 about the time that the university placed a large order with it for
glass. Jefferson wrote Charles F. Kupfer of the manufactory in mid-June with a request for
him to expedite the order, informing Kupfer that the university buildings "will require
between 4. and 5,000. sq. feet of glass all 12. by 18. I. during the present and next year, and
still largely afterwards. not so much this year as the next, having already recieve a
considerable part for this year from Smith & Riddle. this renders a reappointment of agents
for your manufactory at Richmond interesting."[328] The failure of Smith & Riddle, it turned
out, did not prohibit Andrew Smith from continuing to act as an agent for the Boston Glass
Manufactory, and Jefferson had to write back to Kupfer ten days later in order to prevent a
"double supply" of the famed glass.[329]
Back in Charlottesville, James Leitch, without enclosing a proposal, wrote Brockenbrough
in mid-May to inform the proctor that at his store in town he had "on hand Locks, Nails,
Screws, Spriggs, Window pulleys—Sash Cord, Glass, Hinges, Tin, Lead, paints &c.
purchased at request for the Central College Sufficient to complete the Buildings at present
putting up—I presume nothing further will be wanting untill I shall have the pleasure of a
personal interview with you at this place when I am in hopes to have it in my power to make
Such proposals as will be Satisfactory." Moreover, Leitch reminded the proctor of the
impending arrival of 2 rolls of sheet lead and 20 boxes of tin at "John & Saml. Parkhills—&
Six Boxes 12 x 18 Glass at Smith & Riddles," materials that would then be forwarded to
Charlottesville for the construction site.[330] Leitch, in spite of his fears, continued as a
major supplier for the university and in the next eleven months alone he handled $3,267.24
worth of goods for the builders. The materials included glass, putty, sandpaper, sprigs,
screws, nails, locks, hinges, shovels and spades, a wire sifter, tin, lead, iron, steel, blasting
powder, saltpetre, candles, writing paper, wafers, quills, whiskey, salt, and some unknown
items purchased by the contractors.[331]
326. Peyton wrote Brockenbrough on 2 December saying that "I have this day recd. from
Sabbaton of New York 199 Window Waites" for the university, which will be detained until
I hear from you" (ViU:PP). On 9 December Peyton paid $8.84 cash for "freight, Wharfage,
Dragage Canal Toll & Commssn. for recg. & fordg. 199 Window Waits for the University of
Va. from N. York" (Peyton to Brockenbrough, 27 March 1820, ViU:PP).
327. P. A. Sabbaton to Brockenbrough, 24 December 1819, ViU:PP. Sabbaton resubmitted
his bill on 20 February 1820 after Brockenbrough failed to pay it. See Sabbaton to
Brockenbrough, 20 February, and 9 March 1820, in ViU:PP.
331. James Leitch, Account with the University of Virginia, 13 May 1819 to 15 April 1820,
ViU:PP. The $827.87 worth of unlisted items sold to John M. Perry ($183.12), James
Dinsmore ($200.98), Richard Ware (166.68), Giacomo and Michele Raggi ($189.23),
Nelson Barksdale ($26.71), John Harrow ($10.25), and James Oldham ($50.90) were
probably for personal consumption and had to be charged back against the workmen's
accounts with the university.
Miscellanies
A few other loose ends respecting the building had to be tied beginning in the spring and
summer of 1819. Thomas Cooper promised that Philadelphia could produce a tin man for
the university as early as January 1819 but one still had not been found at the end of
July,[332] by which time A. H. Brooks long since had crossed the Blue Ridge Mountains
from Staunton: in early July he was "progressing with the tin Covering & expects to finish
next week."[333] By the fall the word was out that "you are covering your houses with tin,"
and John Van Lew & Co. offered to furnish the university with that article out of its "large
supply."[334] John Perry's undated estimate for the cost of covering "one range of
dormitories done with wood-99 feet long" was probably made before or shortly following
the 26 February resolution by the visitors of the Central College to cover the roofs with tin,
before A. H. Brooks was consulted.[335] Perry projected the cost for framing and covering
the 38 squares of roofing area with 22 inch wooden shingles, "includeing guttering Joint"
and running 1,008 feet of "Shingleing ridges," to be $905, or $295.93 less than covering the
same area with sheet iron for $1,200.88.[336] Preliminary discussions about gutters began in
May, apparently before Perry made that memorandum.[337] It was another year, however,
before Brockenbrough questioned the rector about whether to substitute tin gutters for
wooden ones on the dormitories and flat-roofed pavilions. "It takes 26 Feet of gutter to go
over the dormitory & that at about 25 cents pr foot for Materials & workmanship will cost
$6.50 for each gutter," said the proctor. Tin gutters, he calculated, could be made for $5.34
each since a $15 "box of tin will make 8 gutters . . . will be say $2. for the tin necessary for
each gutter, the workmanship for puting in the same 1$ more pr gutter all other work
preparing, will not be more than $2.34."[338]
332. See Thomas Cooper to TJ, 5 January 1819, TJ to Cooper, 15 April, and Cooper to TJ,
28 July 1819, in ViU:TJ.
334. John Van Lew & Co. to Brockenbrough, 3 October 1819, ViU:PP. Van Lew shipped 20
boxes of tin (at $14 each) to the university in June 1820 by wagoner James Stone and 16
boxes more a month later by Thomas Jackson (see John Van Lew & Co. to Brockenbrough,
14 June, 21 July 1820, in ViU:PP). D. W. & C. Warwick, another Richmond firm, offered to
sell up to 100 boxes of tin to the university for the same price (see D. W. & C. Warwick to
Brockenbrough, 25 April 1820, in ViU:PP).
335. See Minutes of the Board of Visitors of the Central College, 26 February 1819, in
ViU:TJ.
338. Brockenbrough to TJ, 7 June 1820, ViU:TJ. The proctor possibly was thinking of
gutters when he wrote Thomas Perkins of Boston for an estimate of the cost of "Thin
copper" in early June. See Perkins to Brockenbrough, 12 June 1820, in ViU:PP.
Wooden Pipes
The resolution to bring water to the university by wooden pipes from the "neighboring
highlands" was passed at the same visitors' meeting that resolved to cover the roofs with tin
rather than wooden shingles.[339] By late June the decision whether to contract out the pipe
boring or do it with university workmen still had not been made, so Jefferson left it to the
proctor.[340] The matter rested till August, when George W. Spooner, Jr., directed the
"Overseear of the Labouers to proceed with foure hands to get the logs for the conveyance
of the water."[341] Only three days later Spooner reported to the proctor that "We have
nearly all the logs out for conveying the water & shall commence Waggoning them
tomorrow."[342]
Two weeks later James Wade of Lynchburg, a "Very Industrious, punctual man; experienced
in the business," appeared at Jefferson's doorsteps at Poplar Forest wishing to become the
"undertaker of Laying the pipes for Conveying water to the university," as Samuel Jordan
Harrison's letter of introduction said.[343] Willing to undertake at the Philadelphia prices,
"whatever they are, altho' he does not know what they are," Wade considered white oak
(which he advised not to be cut until the last of September!) by far the "best & most durable
& prefers joining the logs by wrought iron boxes & iron hoops on their ends."[344] Wade
visited the construction site and upon his return home wrote to the proctor to offer for
consideration the propriety of having a reservoir that was projected for the mountain placed
in such a manner
university to run from the bottom, on that plan you would have the command of
all the water of the reservoir without the trouble of pumping, and in case of Fire
the Water would flow in the greatest abundance, a handsome Jet d'eau might be
formd with the overplus water if it was thought proper—if this plan would meet
your approbation a circular Reservoir made of Oak Plank 2½ or 3 Inches thick,
to hold 30 or 40 thousand Gallons, would answer it might be sunk sufficently
deep to have a Brick arch to cover it, tis my opinion a Vessel properly made and
well bound with Iron would last 30 Years or much longer.[345]
A version of Wade's reasonable plan was adopted by the university a few years later (see
appendix T). When in the following spring the university was still without a pipe-layer, Elija
Huffman and Aaron Fray proposed to lay pipe for 6¼ cents "per foot running measure the
logs to be delivered in the most convenient place to suit ourselves, the diging & filling up
and the boxes to be furnished by the institution—the worked to be executed in a masterly
manner." Huffman is recorded as laying pipes for the institution until the end of the year
earning $242.53 by the end of September; whether Fray worked as his partner is
unknown.[346] By mid-June 1820 the proctor could report that "Our pipe borers are laying
down the logs they are down for 300 yards—I have conveyed it 300 yards in a covered ditch
at the end of which is a reservoir, 6 by 7 feet & 5 feet deep from whence I take water."[347]
339. See Minutes of the Board of Visitors of the Central College, 26 February 1819, in
ViU:TJ.
346. Huffman and Fray, Proposal for Laying Pipe, 15 April 1820, ViU:TJ; see also Arthur
Spicer Brockenbrough, Statement of Expenditures, 30 September 1820, in DLC:TJ, and
Alexander Garrett's Statement of Vouchers, 14 September 1819 to 14 May 1822, in ViU:PP.
Brockenbrough's statement lists Lewis Bailey and William Boin "& others" as ditching for
the pipes, earning together $111.17 for their labors.
347. Brockenbrough to TJ, 7 June 1820, ViU:TJ. Jefferson later included "bringing water in
pipes" in his estimate of the $10,000 cost for "numerous other contingencies" like covering
with tin instead of shingles and levelling the grounds and streets. See his Statement of
Probable Costs for the Buildings, 28 November 1820, ViU:TJ.
Carter & Phillips
By about mid-summer Curtis Carter and William B. Phillips were well on their way to
fulfilling the brickwork contract that obligated them to make and lay 300,000 bricks before
the first of November. On 20 August Phillips wrote to the proctor to let him know that his
men had put up the walls of the first story of Pavilion I "& shall finish the dormantarys walls
tomorow," after which the "[1]st. tier of Sleepers" could be laid. Furthermore, he estimated
they would finish in 12 or 13 days "with all ease." "Please inform me which will be my next
Job," Phillips said, "so as an arrangement may be maid for me to begin, If I should wait for
work haveing all my hands together at Considerable expence, it will be A ruining Stroke if
we are not Keeped imployed."[348] A week later John Hartwell Cocke, Jr., (who attended
grammar school in the area) visited the brickyard to watch the artisans at work. The dispatch
with which the men carried on their work and which allowed them to finish ahead of
schedule is evident in the description the young boy sent to his father:
brickmaking you must excuse me for not giving you as satisfactory a discription
of it, as I otherwise would have done.—The yard is laid off in a more regular
manner than I ever saw one, and every thing seem to go on with perfect order.
They do not make up their mortar as we do with Oxen but with a spade, and
make it in large piles and cover it with planks a day before they use it, the hole
is near a branch and they always have a good deal of water in it. they have the
table near the place, that they lay down the bricks and move it as they lay them
down, and the mud is rolled to it. I have not yet Seen them moulding brick as I
went there just as they began to Kiln they hack all the bricks in single hacks and
under a large shelter which is erected for the perpose, which efectually keeps
off the sun and rain. the kiln which I saw, was lined with a stone wall about a
foot thick, about half way and the other part with brickbats:—they have got up
the third pavilion as far as the first story, and have finished the brick-work of the
dormitories between that and the Corinthian building.[349]
$247.50) at their kiln so that their gang could burn clinkers in expectation of finishing their
project.[350]
348. William B. Phillips to Brockenbrough, 20 August 1819, ViU:PP. George W. Spooner,
Jr., reiterated Phillips' uneasiness that his men might become idle in a letter to
Brockenbrough of the same date, located in ViU:PP.
349. John Hartwell Cocke, Jr., to John Hartwell Cocke, 27 August 1819, ViU:JHC. On 25
September the younger Cocke wrote his father again, informing him that "I have not been
able to go up to the University since I recieved your last Cas the weather has been very bad
ever since and therefore I can't answer you's with respect to the things which I omitted
before" (ViU:JHC).
350. Phillips & Carter, Account with Alexander Garrett, 28 August to 22 September, and
Phillips to Brockenbrough, 8 September, 1819. Alexander Garrett delivered 67 cords of
firewood to the kiln at cost of $167.50 for the wood plus $30 for 6 days wagonage, and John
Bishop delivered 20 cords to the kiln for $50. The following explanation of clinkers and
their importance in bricklaying cannot be improved upon: "Generally a number of bricks in
the kiln or clamp are overburned or partly vitrified--this to such an extent sometimes that
partial fusion causes two or more bricks to run together, forming one mass more or less solid
throughout. Overburned bricks are know as 'burrs' or clinkers. The latter name is probably
derived from the quality imparted by vitrifaction, which causes them to give a clinking
sound when struck. Or the name may have been taken from the vitrified masses of coal, the
product of furnaces in which great heat is sustained, and which are distinquished from the
ordinary cinders by the name of 'clinkers.' The first name, 'burrs,' may have some reference
to the fact that the bricks have been over-burned" (The Stonemason and the Bricklayer,
202).
A cord measures 4 x 4 x 8 feet.
Jefferson's View of the Progress
As the summer waned, Jefferson, in a letter to the proctor written at Poplar Forest, took
stock of where the building process stood. The west side of the lawn, it could be said, was
shaping up fine. The brick work for Pavilion I would be finished in days, and the skillful
hands of James Oldham could be counted on to fulfill his agreement for its wooden work.
Pavilion II was "done with." Dinsmore & Perry, united together (with Matthew Brown), had
engaged for the brick and wood work of Pavilion III. "No. 4. done with and No. 5. not
engaged." The hotels and dormitories on the back street, originally intended for the
Philadelphia workmen, would not be built this year because of the superintendence
committee's spring disagreement. But the Philadelphians, led by Richard Ware, were busy at
work building three pavilions on the east lawn and Jefferson had not wavered in his wish
that "this whole range may be executed by them." The dormitories no. 1 to 10 were reserved
for Carter & Phillips, which had nearly completed the first four, and the last six, sandwiched
in between Pavilions II and III, could be started whenever the brickmason's wanted. They
would require 60 or 70,000 bricks, and after that, "according to circumstances," Carter &
Phillips could have either Pavilion V on the west lawn or one of the remaining two on the
east side.[351]
Board of Visitors Meeting
Jefferson returned from Bedford in time to ascertain first hand the state of affairs at the
university in preparation for the Board of Visitors meeting on Monday 4 October. The
board's first action was to ratify the actions taken by the committee of superintendence six
months earlier. Next, it instructed the proctor to make an estimate of the amount of money
needed to build the last three pavilions and their dormitories. The board also authorized the
proctor to take the necessary measures to procure for the "two Italian artists" some "proper
Stone or marble" since all the local stone proved incapable of "being wrought into Capitels
for the Columns" of the pavilions. At the meeting the visitors effectively looked ahead
beyond the curtailment of the present building season to the ensuing one, for winter was
closing in fast and the contractors were set to sit it out as best they could. After a final
October surge, progress in building would be slow and at best steady for the next four or
five months.
At their meeting the visitors, as required by law, approved the draft of its annual report to
the president and directors of the Literary Fund, "embracing a full account of the
disbursements, the funds on hand, and a general statement of the condition of the Sd.
University." An inventory of the property formerly owned by the Central College appended
to the report showed that one pavilion and 15 dormitories "have been as nearly finished as is
deemed expedient until wanted for occupation," and one other pavilion was scheduled to be
completed during the winter. Five other pavilions "more or less advanced" and about 20
additional dormitories "in progress," the inventory showed, will "probably have their walls
completed and covered in during the present season, but will not be otherwise finished but in
the course of another . . . for two seasons being generally requisite for the accomplishment
of good buildings, the one for their walls and covering, the other for inner finishings."[352]
Six weeks later the interior work on the second-mentioned pavilion, "far the best of the
whole," had progressed so as to guarantee its completion in the coming winter but its garden
still was not inclosed, and "as it is to be done with brick, there may be a doubt whether the
season is not too far advanced to risk it."[353] (The pavilion was "finished except plaistering
and painting" at winter's end.)[354] On the first of December, when Jefferson finally sent the
report to the Literary Fund, he could add in his cover letter that "the walls of the 7. pavilions
and 37. dormitories then in progression, have been compleated; and their roofs are in
forwardness to be put up in due time. their inner and outer finishings will be the work of the
ensuing year."[355] Two of the Corinthian shafts were scheduled to be in place by then, along
and with 6 of the Doric on Pavilion IV and VIII or X of the Tuscan.[356]
352. Minutes of the Board of Visitors of the University of Virginia, 4 October 1819,
PPAmP:UVA Minutes.
353. TJ to Thomas Cooper, 19 November 1819, ViU:TJ. In a postscript Jefferson added that
"the Pavilion, besides a large lecturing room, has 4. good rooms for family accomodation.
one of them below, large enough for you study & library; a drawing room & 2 bedrooms
above. kitchen & servant's rooms below. the adjacent dormitories (14. f. square) can be used
for your apparatus & laboratory."
354. TJ to Cooper, 8 March 1820, ViU:TJ. Actually, the doors and windows could not be
hung until after the plasterer finished his work (see TJ to John Vaughan, 8 March 1820, in
PPAmP:Maderia-Vaughan Collection).
Carpenters' Dispute
The visitors barely had departed from their October session when Brockenbrough
discovered that he had created some confusion by letting out part of the work that the
committee of superintendence intended for John Neilson to George W. Spooner, Jr., who had
served as the proctor's faithful agent at the university during the months that Brockenbrough
remained in Richmond. (Spooner, the principal carpenter at Hotels C and E and dormitories
14-23 and 24-28 on the east range, served as proctor himself in 1845-1846 and supervised
the construction of Robert Mill's Rotunda Annex in 1853.)[357] Brockenbrough had set
Spooner to work "making the window frames and a part of the work of the first floor" of
Pavilion IX before he learned that the committee had reserved the building for Neilson.
When the proctor realized the potential conflict, he set aside the unallotted portion of the
pavilion's work for Neilson, who was advised of the situation and immediately left Bremo
for the university site to "make the necessary arrangements for the job."[358] Spooner, it
turned out, already had collected the materials needed for both the cellar and first floor,
"except the first floor of Joists," and started to make not only the window frames but interior
doors.
When knowledge of Spooner's progress surfaced it put Nelson "in a very cerly mood" and
the proctor in an especially awkward predicament. "I am certainly desirous that Mr Nelson
should have the Pavilion," Brockenbrough informed Jefferson on 12 October, "but having
made this previous engagement . . . I feel myself bound to let him go with it that far." Since
Nelson "is not disposed to hear any thing I have to say on the subject," the proctor pressed
Jefferson to find a compromise, especially since Spooner's work would not interfere with the
part left for Nelson. "If you think I must discard this young man notwithstanding the
expence & trouble he has been at to provide materials & prepare the work, I will do so,"
Brockenbrough said, "otherwise I shall let him go with the part engaged to him."[359]
Jefferson, quite ill with "the dry hard belly ake attended with a great portion of wind,"[360]
and hence unable to intervene in the dispute, forwarded the proctor's request to the other
member of the committee of superintendence with the instruction that he "decide upon the
business of this letter himself."[361]
When confronted with the situation Cocke insisted that the contract with Spooner "should be
faithfully complied with," but at the same time he thought it might be modified in such a
manner consistent with Spooner's "expectations & interest, and will enable us to fulfil the
assurance which both Mr. J & myself have always given Mr. N—that he shou'd find
employment at the University as soon as his existing engagements wou'd admit of his
undertaking."[362] Cocke recently had employed both Neilson and Spooner in the building
of his Palladian mansion Bremo and presumably knew the temperament of each man well
enough to effect a reconciliation of interests. The compromise that Cocke suggested for the
workmen gave to Spooner the "Sash frames, & joists, of 2d. Story & the roof & Sheeting"
and to Neilson the "making the Sashes the external Cornice and the whole of the inside
work and the use of a part of the workshop now in the occupancy of Spooner at an equitable
rent.—This seems to me to be yeilding to Mr. Spooner as much as he will be giving up to
Mr. N."[363] Spooner's progress was such that the proposal had to be modified somewhat in
early November,[364] and it was December before the pavilion was ready for Nelson's part
of the work to begin.[365]
357. George Wilson Spooner, Jr. (1798-1865), the son of Sally Drake and George W.
Spooner, Sr., of Fredericksburg, worked with John Neilson on the construction of John
Hartwell Cocke's magnificent Palladian mansion on the James River in Fluvanna County,
Upper Bremo, from 1817 to 1819 before coming to the university. At this time Spooner was
boarding with contractor John M. Perry (see Spooner to Brockenbrough, 13 August 1819, in
ViU:PP); in 1821 Spooner married Perry's eldest daughter Elizabeth, and, when Perry
decided to move to Missouri in 1835, the Spooners lived at Montebello, the stately house
that Perry built for himself in 1820 about a half mile south of the unversity. Spooner, who
worked with Perry on Senator William Cabell Rives addition to Castle Hill and on Frascati,
Judge Philip Barbour's Orange County home, built Cocke's Temperance Hall near the
university in 1855, and four years later he put William A. Pratt's "Gothic Revival facade
with gables and towers" on the Albemarle County courthouse (Lay, "Charlottesville's
Architectural Legacy, Magazine of Albemarle County History, 46:45-46). Between 1 Nov.
1819 and 25 Nov. 1822 Spooner received at total of $7,076.28 for his work at the university,
including $1,870.30 for Hotel C and $1,690.34 for Hotel E (ViU:PP, Ledger 1).
361. Someone, apparently one of Jefferson's granddaughters, wrote this note on
Brockenbrough's letter to Jefferson of 12 October and forwarded it to Bremo.
362. Neilson's "existing engagements" included the building of Cocke's Palladian mansion
at Upper Bremo.
363. Cocke to Brockenbrough, 14 October 1819, ViU:PP. The proctor agreed to a modified
version of Cocke's arrangement in a letter to him of 27 October (ViU:JHC).
Brockenbrough's engagement with Spooner apparently contributed to a misunderstanding
between Cocke and Neilson about the latter's contract in the winter of 1820. See Neilson to
TJ, 15 February 1820, in ViU:TJ.
The Year Ends
As the traditional season for building in the handcraft era approached its climax in 1819,
Jefferson could look back upon it with satisfaction in spite of the year's setbacks
(particularly the inability of the stone carvers to keep pace because of the poor quality of
their material). By Christmas eve the approach of winter in the "more genial climate" of his
Virginia south, Jefferson observed to George Ticknor of Harvard, "is scarcely announced by
it's harbingers ice and snow." "Repeated and severed attacks of illness" since his visit to
Warm Springs after the meeting of the Rockfish Gap Commission in the fall of 1818 had not
often prevented his excursions to the university for "daily exercise." With glee Jefferson
could exclaim that the "hobby of his old" age was carried on with "much activity and hope,
and will form an unique and beautiful Academical Villa," in which every professor "will
have a distinct house, or pavilion, to himself," of the "best workmanship of street
architecture, intended as regular and classical models for the lectures on that subject. to each
is annexed a garden and other conveniencies."[366]
|
Chapter 4
The Building Campaign of 1819, Part 2
Documentary History of the Construction of the Buildings at the University
of Virginia, 1817-1828 | |