Science and Technology - The Cambridge Historical Commission Blog

SHOCK WAVES! National Electricity Day

Posted on January 7, 2023January 6, 2023 by cambridgehistoricalcommission

“A bright light is the enemy of rascality”- Cambridge Chronicle July 7, 1883

Ever get your wires crossed? Blown a fuse? Received a rousing charge? Blame it on electricity!

In 1869, two out of the four “great events” of the century, ranked by the Cambridge Chronicle in their issue of May 29^th, were Morse’s invention of the telegraph in the United States, and the laying of the Atlantic Cable. The other two events were the death of slavery in the U.S. and the completion of the Pacific Railway. Alexander Graham Bell made his first telephone call 1876, and then…

Wow! The Electric Telegraph

Although existing in various experimental forms in Europe in the early 19^th century, in the United States it was artist and inventor Samuel F. B. Morse (1791-1821, born in Charlestown, Mass) who made the electric telegraph a reality here. Invented around 1837, it was not until 1843 that Morse received funding from Congress for the first telegraphic line. The cable was strung between Baltimore and Washington, D. C. The first message? “What god hath wrought.”

The transatlantic telegraph was laid between 1854 and 1858. Written a year before its completion, this awestruck note appeared in the Cambridge Chronicle (September 19, 1857) Excerpt:

By 1869, Cambridge had installed 15 fire alarm boxes using the electric telegraph. The boxes were hooked up to only one bell—that of the Methodist Church in Ward Two at the corner of Third and Cambridge streets. In the Cambridge Annual Report of 1870, it was recommended that henceforth they should be connected to one bell in each ward.

Next Came the Lightbulb Moment

“A boastful Edison catalog cover from 1887” (Courtesy of collectorsweekly.com)

As they did with the telegraph, inventors worldwide were attempting to invent an electric light bulb. In 1835, an electric “arc” bulb was demonstrated in Britain. In the U. S., William Sawyer (1850-1883) and Albon Man (1826-1905) were working together in an attempt to invent the first electric light bulbs here. However, the bulbs continued to burn out too quickly and were not mass produced. It was Thomas Edison (1847-1931) who improved the filament and commercialized the incandescent light bulb, for which he received two patents: in 1879 and 1880.

Cambridge was impatient to join the electrical ranks. On July 9, 1881, The Cambridge Chronicle reported: “There is a movement on foot to introduce electric lights in this city,” implying that things could have been moving more swiftly as they had in other towns. By 1880, Boston was using electric lights. In 1883, William J. Marvin, Commissioner of the West Boston and Cambridge bridges, did succeed in having both bridges illuminated by electric lights. On July 7, 1883, the Chronicle proclaimed “A bright light is the enemy of rascality. Lighting our streets by electricity would be equal in value to doubling our police force.”

By 1884, a company “controlled by the American Electric and Illuminating Co.” had been formed to provide electricity to Cambridge, Somerville, Arlington and Watertown. On March 1^st of that year, The Cambridge Chronicle noted that:

Excerpt: *Cambridge Chronicle* March 1, 1884

Still, Cambridge only inched along. Apparently, the Mayor agreed: in 1885, Mayor William E. Russell stated in his annual address:

“Cambridge is certainly behind the times in having no such lighting on her streets.

The expense is much more than lighting by gas; but the improvement is so great that I believe it commends itself to the citizens, and justifies the additional cost. I recommend that, whenever a proper plant is established, the city place electric lights in her squares and on some of her main thoroughfares.”

The following year he was able to proclaim “I am very happy to say that arrangements have been made for the use of electric lighting in our main streets and squares.” This included Main and Cambridge Streets, parts of North Avenue from Harvard Square to the Lexington and Arlington Railroad, and Brattle and other squares. This installation would require approximately 70 lights at “55 cents per lamp per night burning all night, or a total cost (estimating for 339 nights per year) of $13,051,50.” And the other 26 nights…?

Then the Electric Trolley

Spliced car at Arlington Heights (12 May 1898). Source: Frank Cheney.

By 1887, electric trolleys were in use in Kansas City, Cleveland Ohio, Omaha, Nebraska, and Mansfield, Ohio. But not yet in Cambridge.

Referred to as “electrics,” electric trolleys presented a big controversy. Many, many column inches of newspapers were devoted to arguments for or against the trolleys. Advocates hailed efficiencies in transportation; the opposition was of the NIMBY (Not in My Backyard) variety, complaining about the speed, noise, and the esthetics of overhead wires:

The following year, residents on Brattle Street were stillfighting the case, declaring that “the electric trolley system is a new and improper use of streets.” (Cambridge Tribune September 29, 1894). As an aside, perhaps these citizens forgot to take into account the improved the life of squirrels, who could now scamper from one place to another across the wires instead of the roads, not to mention a newfound site for birds to light and socialize!

Electrical interference with the telephones (in use since 1877) was also a problem, as James W. Lovering, Superintendent of Mount Auburn, complained about in this letter to a client in Boston:

“Dear Sir: We were unable to understand your message by telephone this forenoon.

Since the electric cars began running the interference has been so great that we have been unable to use the telephone with any degree of accuracy, and until the telephone company, to whom we have already made complaint remedy the matter it is absolutely unsafe to attempt to send any message by telephone in regard to anything which is of importance.” (March 12, 1889)

But the West End Railway and electric companies forged ahead. Electric companies allowed the telephone and electric trolley lines to be attached to their poles. These unsightly metal poles were being replaced by “fine sticks of timber” (Annual Report 1891). On May 11, 1893, the Chronicle reported that “it is expected that by June 1 the electric railway system will be complete between Boston and Arlington.”

Electric wires over Central Square on June 7, 1910. Boston Elevated Railway negative, CHC collections.

Yikes! 2,000 Miles of Wires

By 1890, the city was crisscrossed with a combined 2,000 miles of wires—telegraph wires, trolley wires, telephone wires, and private electric wires. It was a dangerous situation: crossed wires started fires, webs of wires prevented firemen from reaching buildings, and trolley wires interfered with telephone reception. As a consequence, in July of 1890, the City established a new position: Inspector of Wires. The job was to sort out all the technical, legal, and esthetic issues, and to develop rules and regulations for wiring of all sorts. The position was soon filled by the aptly-named Charles H. Morse. Writing on December 29, 1890, Morse reported:

Soon, the Inspector of Wires’ job description was expanded to include the role of “superintendent of the fire-alarm telegraph, the police signal system and all other electric wires and wire systems.”

Stay tuned for the second and final installment where we explore electric appliances, medical electricity and “The Electrical World”!

Today’s post was written by CHC volunteer Kathleen Fox.

SOURCES

Building Old Cambridge. Susan E. Maycock and Charles M. Sullivan, 2016 Cambridge Historical Commission; the MIT Press

City of Cambridge Annual Reports

Cambridge Public Library Digitized Newspapers

https://www.britannica.com/technology/clock/Electric-clocks

https://archive.curbed.com/ad/17101030/history-of-the-doorbell-nest-hello

https://www.energy.gov/articles/history-light-bulb

https://www.britannica.com/summary/electricity

https://hollisarchives.lib.harvard.edu/ (for the history of the Cambridge Electric Light Co.)

https://www.nsmedicaldevices.com/analysis/brain-stimulation-therapy-history/

https://lemelson.mit.edu/resources/samuel-morsettps://www.elon.edu/u/imagining/time-capsule/150-years/back-1830-1860/

https://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/2012/02/24/downton-abbey-and-electricity/

https://archive.curbed.com/ad/17101030/history-of-the-doorbell-nest-hello

Let There Be Light Bulbs: How Incandescents Became the Icons of Innovation

History Cooperative

https://www.britannica.com/technology/clock/Electric-clocks

“Made to Order Weather”: National HVAC Day, June 22

Posted on June 22, 2022 by cambridgehistoricalcommission

Central Sq. Theater 1929 (Cambridge Ephemera Collection, CHC)

Here we are on the second day of summer, and although it has been on the cool side lately, it’s not hard to imagine the misery of life without air conditioning, especially if you were working in an office building on a hot and humid day in 1899 or so. Fortunately for all of us, 23 years earlier to that date Willis Haviland Carrier been born.

The “father of air conditioning,” Willis Carrier (Courtesy of PickHvac *Cooling & Heating Guide*)

A newly-minted Cornell graduate in engineering in 1901, Carrier (1876 – 1950) was trying to solve a humidity problem for the Sackett-Wilhelms Lithographing & Publishing Company of Brooklyn, New York. He succeeded, and voila–air conditioning was invented. His electrically powered humidity-removing machine had the pleasant side effect of also lowering the temperature. In 1915, Carrier went on to form his own company – Carrier Engineering.

In 1929, The Central Square Theatre proudly advertised that the theatre was “COOLED BY REFRIGERATION.” The Cambridge Sentinel (June 15, 1929) touted this achievement, noting that the cost of installation had been $100,000 and (quaintly) that the air was taken into the “breathing zone” first before being distributed throughout the theatre.

*Cambridge Sentinel* June 15, 1929 (excerpt)

After Carrier’s original invention, it took another twenty years before a small air conditioning unit for residential windows was patented in 1931 by H.H. Schultz and J.Q. Sherman. Again, excerpts from the Cambridge Sentinel July 4, 1931:

“Made To Order Weather”

“St. Louis. – Made to order weather in which the average householder will be able to press a button on winter days and produce a climate of tropic warmth, or press another button and obtain bracing mountain air, was predicted by Willis H. Carrier, president of the American Society of Heating and Ventilating Engineers…. Research work at Harvard, co-ordinated with experiments of the American Society of Heating and Ventilating Engineers at the bureau of mines, indicates… ‘The average human being at rest has a heat output of about 400 body temperature units per hour, the approximate equivalent of a 120 watt electric light,’ he said. ‘This remains remarkably constant throughout normal ranges of temperature, moisture variation, and changes of clothing…..” (This measurement was accurate: today the average heat output of a male body at rest is 100-120 watts per hour.)[i]

By 1934, one of Cambridge’s own, the Air Conditioning Engineering Company at 171 Second Street, began marketing Perfectaire, designed by Raymond A. Sheffield, chief engineer and a senior partner of the firm.

“…It is just as necessary to have proper humidity in the home as to have ample heating. Furthermore, there is a direct relationship between heating and humidity. When humidity of forced air is kept at the proper level less heat is required than under the old dead air system. Air washed and then forced through filters to be immaculately cleaned and distributed throughout a home means better health and reduced heating bills.
Air conditioning equipment protects your investment in a home or business…The writer suggests that you consult the Air Conditioning Eng. Co. at 61 Rogers Street, under the management of Raymond A. Sheffield, for further information pertaining to air conditioning. Mr. Sheffield is an authority on the subject and his connection with the best engineers assures you of competent, dependable service in air conditioning and refrigeration problems. Your old home can be equipped with air conditioning just as well as a new home.
The Air Conditioning Eng. Co. is in a position to supply you with any type or make of system that would best suit your individual requirements on buildings of any kind. By calling Kir.2700 a courteous representative will call and give you a free estimate without obligation.
Do you know why air conditioning is so important to health and comfort?”
Cambridge Sentinel June 27, 1936

Sales Statistics and Costs: (from The Air Conditioner Then and Now)

In 1931, when Schultz and Sherman invented the home air conditioning unit, they could cost from $10,000 – $50,000 per unit. By 1938, the Chrysler air conditioner cost about $416 per unit.[ii]

1940 – Just 1 in 400 US homes had an air conditioner.

1950s – National Homes, manufacturer of pre-fab homes, begins offering central air conditioning as an option for $500.

1960 – The US Census shows that 13% of American homes had AC in at least one room.

1970 – The US Census shows that almost 37% of American homes had AC in at least one room.

1993 – 68% of housing units had air conditioning.

2009 – 87% of housing had some form of AC.

2016 – 100 million US homes have central air conditioning, or about 87% of households.

In 2021 6.28 million window units were sold in the U. S.[iii] , with prices ranging from $15–$800, depending on features such as the BTU, brand, efficiency etc.

Today’s post was written by CHC volunteer Kathleen Fox

SOURCES

“Air conditioners shipments in the U.S. from 2001 to 2020 (in millions)” Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/220357/manufactured-shipments-of-unitary-air-conditioners/.

“A Brief History of HVAC” Coyne College. https://www.coynecollege.edu/a-brief-history-of-hvac-air-conditioning/.

PickHvac. Cooling & Heating Guide, April 28, 2022.

Rardin, Nic. Air Conditioning: Then and Now. July 8, 2015. https://www.hvac.com/resources/air-conditioning-then-and-now/.

“Who Invented Air Conditioning?” MD Air Conditioning & Heating. https://mdairconditioning.com/who-invented-air-conditioning/.

“Willis Carrier” Carrier Company. https://www.carrier.com/carrier/en/worldwide/about/willis-carrier/.

[i] http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2016/ph240/stevens1/Human Body Heat as a Source for “Thermoelectric Energy Generation,” Matthew Stevens, November 27, 2016

[ii] https://www.hvac.com/resources/air-conditioning-then-and-now/

[iii] Statista.com

National Telephone Day

Posted on April 25, 2022April 25, 2022 by cambridgehistoricalcommission

“Telephonic Coal” – What the heck? The above was part of an 1877 advertisement from the Austin C. Wellington Co. in Boston specifically for Cambridge customers to acquaint them with the benefits of ordering coal by telephone. Imagine! In this era of cell phones and 5G, we thought it would be interesting to take a look back 146 years to the dawn of the telephone age.

Alexander Graham Bell changed human communication forever when he placed his “long distance” call from Boston to Thomas A. Watson (at 28 Osborn Street in Cambridge) on October 9, 1876, just three days after receiving the patent for his invention.

Scotsman Alexander Graham Bell (1847-1922), colorized by Sanna_Dullaway

Alexander was born in Scotland. His mother was nearly deaf, and his father taught elocution to the deaf: Bell’s interest in improving communications came naturally. The family emigrated to Canada, and in 1872 Bell moved to Boston to teach and became at the Boston School for Deaf Mutes.

In 1877, seven months after Bell received his 1876 patent, Gardiner Greene Hubbard (the former president of the old Water Company) offered to install telephones at the Water Works and in City Hall, proposing that, “the city shall be to no expense for the same unless they shall prove satisfactory to the Board.” Hubbard felt in interest in having–

*Cambridge Chronicle* May 19, 1877.
“The Board” refers to the Water Board.

Hubbard was more than just the former president of the water company: he was Bell’s father-in-law. In 1877 Bell had married one of his hearing-impaired students, Mabel Hubbard, one of Hubbard’s daughters, who had lost her hearing at age five following a bout with scarlet fever. Gardiner Hubbard was also an investor in a plan to create a telegraph company to compete with Western Union, which backed Bell’s experiments.

Everyone hopped on the telephone bandwagon. The system had a substantial impact on public safety, connecting police and fire stations with their branches. By 1877 many businesses were proudly advertising their telephone connections—but without telephone numbers. In the beginning, callers who subscribed to a private serv ice would pick up the phone and ask an operator at a manual switchboard to connect them by name to the person or business they wanted. (The first switchboard was made in New Haven in 1878 for a grand total of twenty-one subscribers.) Early operators memorized the names of every subscriber. It didn’t take long for this system to become unwieldy, but it needed a medical crisis to develop a more efficient system. In 1879 a physician in Lowell, Massachusetts, worried that, if the town’s four telephone operators all succumbed to the current measles epidemic, no one would be left to operate the switchboards. He suggested a numbering system for each subscriber, and telephone numbers were born.

Like all technologies, the invention of the telephone created lots of new businesses and jobs. First among them were private telephone companies: New England Telephone Co., Suburban Telephone Co., Metropolitan Home Telephone, Cambridge Telephone Exchange, Massachusetts Telephone & Telegraph, and The Telephone Despatch, “Organized for the Introduction of the TELEPHONE”:

A month later, the company announced that it already had orders for eighty-eight telephones:

Then there was the astonishing new “Telephone Harp” demonstrated by the inventor Frederick Allen Gower at a concert at Union Hall on January 23, 1878:

Gower set up the “newly invented telephone in the bakery of Mr. Frank A. Kennedy on Green street, and from the general office in Pearl street, Boston. … He then called for a cornet solo at Mr. Kennedy’s bakery, and it was given clearly and loudly, the notes being perfectly rendered, both through the instrument on the platform, or through instruments depending from the ceiling by wires…”

After that was a demonstration of the Telephone Harp: an instrument comprising steel tongues set into a steel frame, beneath which was a hammer similar to a piano key. When the keys were played, the vibrating steel tongues came in contact with a metallic point opening a circuit. The notes where then transmitted over the wires to the telephone instruments in the hall. The Quadruplex telephone in the advertisement was actually an electric telegraph system invented by Thomas Edison in 1874 that allowed four separate signals to be transmitted simultaneously. The crowd was dazzled.

Needless to say, there were commentaries on what this new-fangled invention meant to daily life:

Some more philosophical comments waxed on about the changes to daily life brought on by telephones. Below are excerpts from the Cambridge Chronicle (March 16, 1878), which called the telephone the “crowning invention of the age.” Change a few of the details and the complaint could have been written today about the speed of contemporary life:

“…parties were in adjoining rooms…. The beauty of thing will be that everybody will feel the necessity of having a telephone. The business places which do not have a telephone will naturally be at a disadvantage, and will soon succumb to the pressure……For ordinary messages the memory of the operator at the central office will suffice, but for longer ones a phonographist would be required.”
Cambridge Chronicle March 16, 1878

Does anyone know what a “phonographist” might have been?

In 1879 the Chronicle reported there were 30,000 telephones in the United States (Sept. 20, 1879). In 1883 the paper carried an article about telephone usage world-wide:

Trouble in River City: In 1887 trials in Cambridge of the “electric motor” cars produced substantial interference on the telephone lines. Customers complained: among them was James W. Lovering, Superintendent of Mount Auburn Cemetery and an early adopter of the telephone. By 1889 he was so fed up that he wrote to New England Tel & Tel: “the telephone service is so bad from this buzzing noise on the wires that we are unable to do any business with it, and unless it can be put right at once I do not care to continue the instrument in the office.” And, to one of the monument makers: “Since the electric cars began running the interference has been so great that we have been unable to use the telephone with any degree of accuracy, and until the telephone company … remedy the matter it is absolutely unsafe to attempt to send any message by telephone in regard to anything which is of importance.”

Lovering wasn’t alone. In October of 1889 a meeting of telephone subscribers was convened to address complaints:

A month later, the Cambridge Telephone Exchange “agreed to put in what is called the McClure system at an expense of $7000. This system is said to be such as to remedy the existing trouble.” (Cambridge Chronicle November 9, 1889)

But the troubles didn’t end there….

Installing telephone equipment on public streets produced hundreds of kerfuffles that were reported in the newspapers. In the decade 1890-1899, there were about 1,400 articles, editorials, or announcements about telephones—poles, wires, rates, etc. An example of one of the more benign complaints:

Hard to know exactly what this complaint was about:

The Cambridge Tribune reprinted this tidbit from the Boston papers on October 28, 1899:

Cambridge Chronicle June 9, 1883

Stereograph of “Long distance telephone switchboard.” (ca. 1893–1920).
Boston Public Library Arts Department via Digital Commonwealth, https://ark.digitalcommonwealth.org/ark:/50959/nk322r32k

The rest, as they say, is history …
146 years …

Various images of telephones. User credits (L to R) via Openverse: France1978, plenty.r, Pete Prodoehl, and Sean Dreilinger

Today’s post was written by CHC volunteer Kathleen Fox.

SOURCES
Cambridge Public Library digitized newspaper collection
Mount Auburn Cemetery Copying Books
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Alexander-Graham-Bell
Historical Marker Database: https://www.hmdb.org/m.asp?m=49766
https://historycambridge.org/innovation/First%20Phone%20Call.html
https://statetechmagazine.com/article/2017/09/telephone-switchboard-connected-country
https://forums.republicwireless.com/t/the-history-of-the-phone-number

National Gardening Day: Charles Mason Hovey

Posted on April 14, 2021April 13, 2021 by cambridgehistoricalcommission

Portrait of Charles Mason Hovey included in his work *The Fruits of America*

The Lady Sweet Apple, from *The Fruits of America*

Before you chomp into that next apple, pause for a moment to consider Charles Mason Hovey, Cambridge resident and world-renowned pomologist. He co-founded the American Pomological Society and wrote The Fruits of America in an effort to “reduce the chaos of names” and document consistency in naming fruits. As he was remembered:

“Horticulture on this continent is probably more indebted to him than to any living man.”
“The Gardeners’ Monthly and Horticulturist” (Meehan, 1886)

Charles M. Hovey was born on Brookline Street in Cambridge in 1810, the sixth of seven children born to Phineas Brown Hovey (1770-1852) and Sarah Stone (1769-1846). His father’s family first arrived on American shores in 1635, and six generations later Charles’ father was proprietor of a grocery store at the corner of Main and Brookline Streets and an investor in Cambridgeport properties. Phineas Sr. being one of 16 children, Charles had 15 aunts and uncles on his father’s side alone – – which may explain why there are so many Hovey’s in Cambridge. The City Directory for 1848 (the first one available digitally) lists 15 Hoveys. The family included several grocers (including Charles’ brother Josiah Dana Hovey, see below), real estate agents, fire engineers, architects, a carriage smith, and a bacon curer.

An earlier relative, Thomas Hovey, ran the prominent Hovey Tavern in Cambridgeport which was burned down in 1828. The lithograph below, made from a drawing Charles Mason made of the tavern, shows his considerable drafting skills:

Excerpt of print in the collection of the Boston Athenaeum

Significantly, Charles’ father also owned a large garden, running from Massachusetts avenue at Pearl Street through to Franklin Street.

C. M. Hovey’s formal education appears to have ended with his 1824 Graduation from Cambridge Academy at the age of 14. By his mid- teens he was already enthusiastically gardening in his father’s garden. He took after the 18th century taxonomist Linnaeus, with a scientific approach to his interest, keeping meticulous notes and drawings on species and varieties. He did not want for energy: by age 19 he had a strawberry collection; and by age 24 he had created the first American strawberry derived from crossing varieties. Between 1832 and 1835 he had established his nursery in Cambridge, a seed store in Boston, and the first gardening magazine in America.

HOVEY & CO.

In 1832, at the age of 22, Charles and his brother Phineas Brown Hovey, Jr., (age 29) began their nursery with the purchase of one acre of land in Cambridgeport. Eight years later in 1840 they purchased 40 more acres on Cambridge St. Charles lived next door at 381 Broadway between Fayette and what would become Maple Street. The house/cottage that stood at 381 Broadway at the time Charles Hovey lived there no longer exists. The home was torn down in 1893 to make way for a new house constructed for then-owner owner John McFarlane.

1854 Walling Map with arrow towards Hovey’s house on Broadway

The nursery was divvied up into sections with pears and other fruit trees planted along its interior “lanes.” By 1848 the property included four greenhouses, each of which were 84 feet long. The size of his nursery was so staggering it is difficult to comprehend. The Cambridge Chronicle reported “Of pear trees it shows 1000 health and beautiful specimens growing in avenues, embracing about 400 varieties; while of these trees in stocks and ready purchasers, there are about 50,000. Of peaches, there are some 8,000 trees; of apples 200 varieties, and 30,000 trees for sale; of plums nectarines, apricots, cherries, about an equal number. (July 13, 1848).

Hovey specialized in the hybridization of plants, in particular was camellias. He developed a Camellia Japonica and named it for his wife, the “Mrs. Ann Maria Hovey.”

C.japonica ‘CM Hovey’ via International Camellia Society

Hovey’s Camellia house. Image: Arnold Arboretum.

“…the whole neighborhood is scented with their odor, and an array of smaller flowering plants beautifully arranged the greenhouses and outdoors.” (Cambridge Chronicle July 13, 1848)

The Hovey strawberry, “regarded as the foundation of the New England strawberry industry” was grown on large scale until about 1890. It was “the first American strawberry variety that resulted from a planned cross, and it is an ancestor of most modern varieties.” (University of Vermont)

The Hovey’s Seedling Strawberry, from *The Fruits of America* (1851)

Apparently, one need not go directly to the nursery to place orders. Here is an unlikely sales agent:

Two years after starting the nursery, in 1834 Hovey and his brother Phineas B. (also a horticulturist) opened
A “Horticultural Seed Store” at 79 & 81 on Cornhill (previously called Market Street) in Boston. It was conveniently located just below the offices of the Mass. Horticultural Society at #81 Cornhill.

Eventually the store moved to 53 North Market Street, opposite Faneuil Hall:

Image: Mount Auburn Historical Collections.

*Boston Evening Transcript* April 6, 1865

THE MASSACHUSETTS HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY

Hovey was a regular exhibitor at the Massachusetts Horticultural Society from as early as 1831, two years after the society was founded. By 1833 he was an official member. He served on numerous committees, in particular the Committee on the Library, and won countless weekly exhibition prizes. He served as President from 1863-1867. During that time, he oversaw the construction of the new hall for the society, laying the cornerstone and dedicating it in 1865 at 100-102 Tremont Street, at the corner of Bromfield St, opposite the Granary Burying Ground:

Exterior view of Horticultural Hall, corner of Tremont Street and Bromfield Street, ca. 1880. Image: Historic New England.

PUBLICATIONS

America’s first magazine dedicated to horticulture was started by Charles and his brother Phineas Jr. “The American Gardener” appeared on the scene in 1835. Later the name charmingly changed to “The Magazine of Horticulture, Botany, and All Useful Discoveries and Improvements in Rural Affairs.” Hovey remained its editor until 1868 when it ceased publication. (Hutchinson)

Cover of “American Gardener’s Magazine and Register of Useful Discoveries and Improvements in Horticulture and Rural Affairs” (1835)

Perhaps most impressive is Hovey’s two-volume quarto, The Fruits of America, with luscious chromolithographs by William Sharp which he published between 1848-1856.

Title page of *The Fruits of America*, volume 1 by C.M. Hovey (published 1848-1856)

The Coe’s Golden Drop Plum from *The Fruits of America*

The Hovey Cherry from *The Fruits of America*

FAMILY LIFE

In 1835 Hovey married Ann Marie Chaponil. (1814-1871). The couple had five daughters and one son. Only three of their children survived past the age of 33. Tragedy came to Hovey’s door in the 1870’s when in quick succession he lost his wife to consumption in 1871, two daughters in 1872 (one also of consumption) and a third daughter lost to consumption in 1878. Their son followed in his father’s footsteps and became a horticulturist in California.

THE DEMISE OF THE NURSERY

After Hovey’s death, the nursery was taken over by William E. Doyle (1843-1916), Cambridge democratic politician, alderman and prominent florist in Boston. Recognizing the value of the Hovey name, he referred to Hovey in all advertising, but renamed the nursery “Doyle’s Conservatories,” which he operated at #1509 Cambridge Street until around 1914.

Then, in the 1890’s land on Cambridge Street began to be sold off for residential development. Doyle put through Camellia Avenue on the west of the Hovey estate and Leonard Ave on the east. By 1893 he had built eight houses on Leonard Street, with ten more in the works.

Excerpt from the *Cambridge Tribune* May 6, 1893.

The street names Hovey, Myrtle, Magnolia and Camellia Avenues mark the neighborhood bounds of the nursery. By 1894 the site for the Holy Ghost Hospital for Incurables had already been laid out.

In 1895, the Holy Ghost Hospital for Incurables was established by the sisters of Charity of Montreal, whose founder was Marguerite d’Youville.

Postcard of Holy Ghost Hospital for Incurables, published by M. C. Lane Co., Boston

The name evolved over the years to the Youville Hospital, Youville Hospital and Rehabilitation Center, and finally, in 2009, the Spaulding Hospital of Cambridge. Click here to read our blog post and learn about the history of the former Holy Ghost Hospital.

DEATH

Charles Mason Hovey died of heart disease on September 1, 1887

Engraving based on portrait by Alonzo Hartwell of Boston

He is buried in Lot 4205 on Mound Avenue in the Mt. Auburn Cemetery

Hovey had been an Honorary member of the Royal Societies of London and of Edinburgh, and President of the Cambridgeport Horticultural Library Association

Excerpt from the *Cambridge Chronicle* November 5 1887 upon the death of Jenny Lind, two months after the death of C.M. Hovey

Today’s post was written by CHC volunteer, Kathleen Fox.

SOURCES

“A Taste for Horticulture B. June Hutchinson” Arnold Arboretum
Ancestry.com
Appletons’ Cyclopædia of American Biography
Cambridge Public Library Digital Newspapers and Atlases
Friends of Mount Auburn. 2012. “Charles Mason Hovey (1810 – 1887).” Mount Auburn Cemetery (blog).
January 16, 2012.
Grubinger, Vern. n.d. “History of the Strawberry.” Uvm.Edu.
Hutchinson, B. June. 1980. “A Taste for Horticulture.” Arnoldia 40 (1): 31–48.
Kevles, Daniel J. July/August 2011. “Cultivating Art.” Smithsonian Magazine, July/August 2011.
Massachusetts Horticultural Society, and Robert Manning. 1880. History of the Massachusetts Horticultural
Society. 1829-1878. Boston, Mass.
Meehan, Thomas. 1886. The Gardeners’ Monthly and Horticulturist.
Mount Auburn Cemetery
Wikipedia
Wilson, James Grant, and John Fiske (eds). 1888. Appletons’ Cyclopædia of American Biography. New York: D. Appleton & Co.

Torn Down Tuesday: Viscol Manufacturing Co., 200 First Street

Posted on June 23, 2020June 18, 2020 by cambridgehistoricalcommission

Located at the intersection of Binney and First Streets in East Cambridge, a man named Adolph Sommer lived and died for his business. Adolph Sommer, born and educated as a chemist in Germany, later worked as a druggist in California, where he first studied and then taught at UC Berkeley. There he discovered the formula from which he afterwards made his principal product, Viscol. By about 1890, he removed to Cambridge, and opened a small wooden factory building in the rapidly developing industrial area of East Cambridge. The history of “Viscol” as a trademark began by Adolph Sommer in 1889, as “leather-grease”. Sommer was at the time a resident of California, and the product to which the mark was applied was a liquid preparation made principally from vegetable or animal oils and chloride or sulphur. There is evidence that this preparation was being advertised in California as early as 1891 for sale in cans as “Viscol dressing” for softening, waterproofing and preserving boots, shoes, harness, belting, etc.

Viscol Co. P1010883 — Viscol can, CHC Objects Collection.

Viscol Co. P1010877 — Viscol box and can, CHC Objects Collection.

Sommer was actively engaged in the operation and development of the Viscol business in Cambridge and during this period of over 40 years, the product was advertised nationwide under the “Viscol” mark in shoe and leather journals and in Montgomery Ward catalogs. Sales during the period were made in small cans to merchandising outlets for retail distribution, and in 5-gallon cans and 50-gallon drums to tanneries for use in processing leather. Sommer oversaw the expansion of the company which coincided with the need for more manufacturing space and employees. The complex consisted of three buildings along First Street.

1930 Atlas map showing extent of Viscol Mfy in blue.

Viscol_Co_001 — Undated flyer depicting multiple uses of Artgum, an artificial rubber developed by Viscol Company. Original located in CHC Ephemera Collection.

Viscol_Co_002 — Undated flyer depicting multiple uses of Artgum, an artificial rubber developed by Viscol Company. Original located in CHC Ephemera Collection.Enter a caption

In Cambridge, Adolph lived alone, had no social relations, worked an unusual number of hours everyday, never took a vacation nor allowed his employees to take any, permitted no conversation or cooperation among his employees, and even lived in the manufacturing plant. He was known as being industrious, alert, keen, strong willed and stubborn; yet, he was kind to his employees when they got into financial difficulties, and many worked for him for decades. In 1922, when seventy-one years old, Sommer married a widow of fifty-one, Emmeline Harnden, who had worked in the factory for more than twenty years. At the time of their marriage, Sommer was actively looking for someone to take over his business and generated a written contract with his new wife that upon his death, the company and all holdings would go to his legal heirs, which apart from his widow, were two children of a deceased sister in Germany.

First Street 200 — 200 First Street, built for Adolph Sommer and Viscol Manufacturing Co. Building constructed in 1904, razed in 1986. Photo taken 1970, CHC Survey Photo.

First Street 185 — 185 First Street, built for Adolph Sommer and Viscol Manufacturing Co. Building constructed in 1913, razed in 1986. Photo taken 1970, CHC Survey Photo.

On October 1933, 82-year-old Sommer and his plant superintendent, Hans Bloomberg, picked up over $1,000 from the Lechmere Bank on Cambridge Street before driving back to the factory to pay the workers. Upon arriving to the factory, five robbers with pistols trapped the car and demanded the money. One man pointed a gun at the face of Sommer, who was sitting in the driver seat of his vehicle. When he saw the pistol, 82-year-old Sommer is said to have swung the door open and lunged at the robbers gathering his pistol from his pocket. Upon lunging he was shot three times and died, but not before shooting one of the thieves, who got into a get-away car and fled over the Prison Point Bridge to Charlestown.

Article — Boston Daily Globe clipping from October 21, 1933 detailing crime scene.

Capture — Boston Daily Globe clipping from October 21, 1933 depicting Mr. Adolph Sommer.

There were few leads besides the witnesses, one of which identified the gunman to Cambridge Police as James Deshler. It was soon after unveiled to the public that Edward Galvin of 22 Lambert Street, was the witness who placed Deshler as the gunman. Within a week of the arrest, three men attacked Galvin in a parking lot, seemingly as retribution and were never identified. Two men were eventually imprisoned for the robbery and murder of Mr. Sommer, James Deshler and Marshall “Hickey” Bowles. After the death of Sommers, the company and properties were sold in 1936 to the Stamford Rubber Supply Company, a Connecticut corporation located at Stamford, Connecticut, which operated the business as one of its own departments until January 1937, later selling again. The complex was used for other industrial and storage uses until they were razed in the mid 1980s.

The Ashton Valve Company

Posted on April 7, 2020May 13, 2020 by cambridgehistoricalcommission

Today’s post was written by guest author Rick Ashton and tells the story of the Ashton Valve Company, formerly located at 161 First Street, East Cambridge.

The sound of a steam train whistle in the distance can stir your imagination. The Ashton Valve Company offered locomotive whistles in sizes up to 48″ tall. The beautiful brass gauges in the cab of a locomotive and the safety valves on the engine also could have been manufactured by Ashton Valve. For over 100 years the company was one of the leading manufacturers of railroad-related items.

ashton_lock_valve_patent_1872-1024x1522 — Courtesy Rick Ashton, https://newsm.org/manufacturers/ashton-valve-co/

One Ashton item was an innovation that saved lives. How? If the engine’s boiler happened to build up too much pressure, the Ashton “Pop” Safety Valve would activate or “pop” and let the excess steam blow off, preventing a possible boiler explosion. We have Henry G. Ashton to thank for that life-saving invention.

Henry G. Ashton was born in Norfolk, England in 1846 (Editor’s note: Henry G. Ashton is the great-great-grandfather of this post’s guest author, Rick Ashton). He attended public schools and took courses in mechanical engineering. In 1869 he arrived in Boston, Massachusetts with his wife Emma and infant son, Albert. He was first employed by the Hinkley Locomotive Works. In 1871 he invented his Lock-up “Pop” Safety Valve. It was the first effective safety valve to actually work and was an immediate success. He formed the Ashton’s Lock Safety Valve Company (Ashton Valve Company) and set up shop on Pearl Street in Boston with three other employees. In 1872 the company secured a contract with the United States Navy for safety valves, a contract they held for 76 years.

Ashton_Valves_Adverts_001-300 — Henry G. Ashton. Courtesy Rick Ashton.

The Great Boston Fire of 1872 destroyed the Pearl Street building, but the company persevered and by 1879 they relocated to 271 Franklin Street, a building they would occupy for 27 years. The building was four stories tall and business was so strong that in 1900 a fifth floor was added to keep up with the demand. In 1892 they purchased the Boston Steam Gauge company and began manufacturing steam gauges, a perfect compliment to the various steam related valves they were producing. The gauges were manufactured with the same assurance of quality as the valves were.

ashton_valvegauge_ad

After 24 years of managing the company, Henry Ashton, the company founder, died in 1895. His son Albert, who had attended engineering classes at MIT, took over many of the management responsibilities and ran the company for the next 27 years.

Ashton Valve outgrew the Franklin Street building and in 1907 they built a new facility at 161 First Street in East Cambridge. The building was 45,000 square feet and was built at a cost of $67,000. That’s $1,797,000 in 2018 dollars. A completely modern building, it had electricity on all floors and modern bathroom facilities. The building still stands today with the Ashton Valve name carved in granite over the front entrance.

Sentinel19201225-01.2.84-a6-700w — Credit: Cambridge Sentinel, 1921.

1-161First-StreetEXT.

Screenshot 2020-04-06 at 3.38.01 PM — 161 First Street today. Credit: Google Maps.

By 1907 the company had sales offices all over the world. Ashton products were internationally known for their quality. As their advertisements stated, “higher in first cost but cheapest in the end.” The 1920’s and 1930’s were the peak years and the company employed up to 300 people. Their profits often were in the millions (in today’s dollars).

Ashton’s Railroad Division had been the backbone of the company since its inception in 1871 and was run as a separate entity until the 1950’s. They produced separate catalogs for the valves, whistles, and gauges used on trains. Some of the Ashton products produced for the train industry included: locomotive mufflers and open pop safety valves, steam gauges including the Ashton-Lane-Bourdon locomotive gauge, double spring steam locomotive gauges, duplex steam and heat gauges, air brake gauges, protected dial pressure gauges, air brake recording gauges, wheel press recording gauges, locomotive steam whistles and whistle valves.

49033923077_be405083f1_o — Ashton Valve pressure gauge, ca. 1923-1924. CHC Objects Collection. Photographed by John Dalterio.

With the advent of diesel locomotives, electricity, and gas engines, sales started to drop off in the late 1940’s. The peak years were over. In 1948 Ashton merged with the Crosby Valve and Gauge Company, but kept the Ashton name alive until sometime in the early 2000’s. Today one is liable to see the Ashton Valve name on gauges sold on eBay to collectors, and they demand a high price.

The next time you hear a train whistle in the distance, think of the Ashton Valve company – it could be an Ashton whistle!

Sources and Related Reading:

The Ashton Valve Company

https://steampunk-explorer.com/articles/family-history-steam

https://cambridgehistory.org/industry/ashtonvalve.html

https://www.steamlocomotive.com/appliances/safetyvalve.php

T.J. Flynn Metal Works Inc.

Posted on November 18, 2019May 14, 2020 by cambridgehistoricalcommission

Today we are highlighting some archival photographs that we recently digitized. In our archive’s stacks there is a flat box housing seven mounted photographs associated with the T.J. Flynn Metal Works Inc., a 20^th century Cambridge business.

Life raft metal cross-section. T.J. Flynn Metal Works Collection, CHC.

The earliest reference to the company was in 1914, when Thaddeus J. Flynn’s T.J. & Sons Co., Sheetmetal Works, was located on Albany Street in Cambridgeport. This family company witnessed many location changes from 1914 to the 1930s. In 1918 it was at 37 Albany Street, then it moved to 18-20 Portland Street in 1925, and in 1930 it was located at 49 Albany Street. By 1918, the name of the company changed to its more well-known version, T.J. Flynn Metal Works Inc.

Associated with this larger business was Flynn Roofing and Metal Co., run by Flynn’s son, Edmund T. Flynn. It also moved around the neighborhood – residing at 37 Albany Street in 1917, 8 Portland in 1920, then 35 Albany Street between 1921-1922, and subsequently 49 Albany Street in 1937. Unfortunately, none of the original buildings have photographic references in the CHC files and the larger company was officially unincorporated by 1968-1972, although its final locations are unknown.

During the heyday of the T.J. Flynn Metal Works Inc., Thaddeus married Mary A. Flynn. Their son Edmund invented a life-raft design in the early 1900s. The photographs in the CHC’s archival box are accounts of his work.

A polygonal-shaped testing model raft created by Edmund T. Flynn. T.J. Flynn Metal Works Collection, CHC.

It is unknown when these images were taken since they do not reflect Edmund’s patent approved by the U.S. Patent Office on July 16, 1918. His final design notes emphasize how the official raft was “substantially pointed” at each end and that the “buoyant member is non-circular in cross-section.” The polygon version reflected in the photographic images could have been an earlier design Edmund scrapped during his tests at Scituate Harbor. Or, it could have been a later revision since his patent was updated in 1941.

Two unidentified men standing in a raft to demonstrate the submerged section. T.J. Flynn Metal Works Collection, CHC.

Nevertheless, Edmund’s patented life-raft was a success. It was used in both World Wars and it was officially approved for use on ocean, coast, bay, lake and sound vessels by the Department of Commerce.

E.T. Flynn’s patent design authorized by the U.S. Patent Office on July 16, 1918. Patent # 1,272,412. Source: USPTO PatFT database.

Thaddeus also gained a patent in 1929 for a roof drain. A year later, on September 9, 1930, Thaddeus died, and his wife Mary became president of the company. She was assisted by J. Henry Flynn and his wife Belinda S. Flynn, who were first referenced as additional owners of the company in 1925. However, by 1968-1972 the family business had dwindled out. Edmund’s son, Jonathan, opened European Engineering in Belmont, MA in 1958 but it was ultimately a failed venture. Jonathan’s son, Nick, recounts his father’s subsequent journey in “The Button Man,” published in The New Yorker in 2004.

Torn Down Tuesday: Prest-O-Lite

Posted on October 29, 2019February 14, 2024 by Meta Partenheimer

Welcome to Torn Down Tuesday where we feature buildings in Cambridge that have been demolished. Today we highlight the building that once stood where the Fresh Pond Mall is located today: 541 Concord Ave, the Prest-O-Lite industrial complex.

Aerial views: Prest-O-Lite complex at 541 Concord Ave (1947 and 1948)

Businessmen Carl Fisher, James Allison and P.C. Avery started Concentrated Acetelyene Company (later changed to Prest-O-Lite) in Indianapolis in 1906 with the plan to manufacture portable cylinders containing compressed acetylene.

Motor Vehicles – In Use – Model 18-F three-speed twin, Prest-O-Lite attachment with side car. Photographer: Harley-Davidson Motor Co., 1917-1918 (NARA)

The cylinders would allow drivers of motorcycles and automobiles to operate headlights on their vehicles via a sparking switch.

Advertisement from *Scientific American* (6 January 1912)

The company invented this technology before the use of electric lights, which were pioneered by Cadillac in 1912. In 1920, the Prest-O-Light Company obtained a permit to build a plant in Northwest Cambridge. The complex would include 13 buildings with the purpose of producing acetylene for use their line of products.

1930 Bromley Atlas image showing location of Prest-O-Lite complex

Bordered by Concord Ave and Alewife Brook Parkway, the site was originally marshland and later owned by the New England Brick Company. Construction for Prest-O-Lite was carried out by John T. Scully Co. builders, a company that had completed large projects for companies such as Simplex Wire & Cable Company and lumber dealer E. D. Sawyer. Like many industrial buildings of Northwest Cambridge from this period, the buildings were of an extended form and low scale.

Clipping from *Cambridge Chronicle* (7 August 1920)

North Cambridge was composed of prime agricultural land during the colonial period, while West Cambridge began as a swath of grazing land before evolving into a fringe industrial area during the 19th century. Up until the mid-twentieth century, much of the area was still composed of industrial or commercial properties.

Image of Prest-O-Lite fire, unknown source (1952)

Prest-O-Light operated in North Cambridge for over three decades without major incident. However, at 1:15pm on the day after Christmas 1952, an explosion of 200 gas cylinders rocked the neighborhood and shattered windows up to half a mile away. It was reported that the multi-colored flames rose 200 feet over the building and the ensuing smoke was visible from 20 miles away.

Aerial image of Fresh Pond Shopping Center, Patriquin Collection (1984)

Just a few years after the massive fire, the Prest-O-Lite complex was razed in 1959 to make way for the Fresh Pond Shopping Center, which was developed in 1962. Check out our Instagram post to read more about the Fresh Pond Shopping Center!

Sources:
Krim, Arthur J. Survey of Architectural History in Cambridge: Report Five: Northwest Cambridge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1977.
https://www.firstsuperspeedway.com/articles/prest-o-lite
https://www.firstsuperspeedway.com/sites/default/files/Prest-O-Lite.pdf
https://cambridgehistory.org/research/cars-in-cambridge-by-doug-brown/

Modern Monday: Harvard Science Center

Posted on April 8, 2019May 14, 2020 by cambridgehistoricalcommission

The Harvard Undergraduate Science Center at 1 Oxford Street, is a pre-cast concrete behemoth designed by Josep Lluís Sert (1902-1983) the Dean of the Harvard Graduate School of Design at the time.

Science Center_2019 — Staff photo of Harvard Science Center (1 Oxford Street) April 2019.

Designed in 1970 and completed just two years later, the Brutalist structure integrates its siting along the three major streets in which it is framed: Kirkland, Oxford and Cambridge Streets and is a visual link between Harvard Yard and the North Yard. The design terraces upward from the pedestrian mall overpass at Cambridge Street to limit the massing and shifts the bulk of the structure back (north) with just a more pedestrian-scaled section fronting the mall. A central spine runs down the building which visually serves as an upwards staircase and terminates at a nine-story tower. Science Center Model_Radcliffe Archives_1970 Science Center Model aerial_Radcliffe Archives_1970

Science Center under construction_Harvard Archives 1971
Approximately two-fifths of the cost of the $25 Million building centered around the two un-adorned concrete towers on the western and eastern walls of the Science Center. The non-descript boxes are water-cooling towers intended to service not only the Center itself, but all buildings in the North Yard. The towers are connected by a massive pump room in the basement. The tarantula-like steel girders seemingly creep over the lecture hall area and serve to support the roof of the auditorium.

Science Center exterior_Radcliffe Archives_1970s

Science Center aerial_Radcliffe Archives_1973

Science Center Interior 1st floor_Radcliffe Archives_1973

Science Center Interior 1st floor_Harvard Archives_2011

It is believed that Sert took inspiration for the design from his former mentor, Le Corbusier, who designed the Carpenter Center for the Visual Arts at Harvard just ten years prior. The Science Center was influenced by an unbuilt project, The Palace of the Soviets, designed for Russia by Le Corbusier in 1931 and worked on by Sert as a young architect. The current Science Center borrows the steel girder and cable vocabulary from the unbuilt Palace of the Soviets along with the use of pre-cast concrete panels to somewhat pay homage to his mentor. Sert loved the use of concrete as an “honest and muscular material that could be molded into any shape” and liked to set splashes of bright color against its textured grey – “like a parade of elephants and parrots”.

LeCorbusier’s Model of the Palace of the Soviets (unbuilt)

Aerial of the Palace of the Soviets (unbuilt)

Harvard later outgrew the Science Center and hired firm Leers-Weinzapfel Associates Architects in 2004 to expand the science village. Three vertical additions of minimal steel-framed glass volumes contrast in materiality from the concrete panel main structure yet echo elements of the initial design. The verticality of the glass panes creates a visual rhythm with the vertical grooves in the older precast concrete panels. At the interior, splashes of color and light flood the spaces and the newly dedicated museum space is visually connected to a light-filled terrace.

Rendering of completed additions by LWA Architects.

Completed additions by LWA Architects.

Interior courtyard with new addition by LWA Architects.

Modern Monday: William James Hall

Posted on December 10, 2018May 14, 2020 by cambridgehistoricalcommission

Today’s #ModernMonday post is highlighting William James Hall, built in 1964 and designed by famed architect Minoru Yamasaki. Harvard University hired Yamasaki to design a new building to house the new Behavioral Science Department, including: offices, laboratories, animal quarters, classrooms and a library for the growing department. The new building was constructed largely of precast concrete panels, set inside slender columns which were poured in place concrete. The building features an observation deck at the top floor which is screened from the street to allow researchers to study passersby on the street below without them knowing.

Full height_Radcliffe Archives — Image courtesy of Radcliffe Archives.

The 15-story structure was designed in the New-Formalism style which Yamasaki perfected. He is known today as being one of the two masters (Edward Durell Stone being the other) of the architectural style, which typically exemplified symmetrical facades, columnar arched supports and smooth-finished and un-adorned wall materials, commonly in a white color. Yamasaki is likely most well-known for his 1970 design of the World Trade Center towers in Manhattan. Yamasaki also designed Harvard’s Engineering Science Lab at 40 Oxford Street in 1962.

William James Hall_Model_Photograph — Photograph of Model by Sebastian Korab.

The $5.8 million dollar building was named for William James, a philosopher, whose pioneer work was undertaken at Harvard. Initially trained in painting, James abandoned the arts and enrolled in Harvard in 1861 to study chemistry and anatomy. In 1875 James taught one of the university’s first courses in psychology, “The Relations between Physiology and Psychology,” for which he established the first experimental psychology demonstration laboratory. In 1890 James published a highly influential, two-volume synthesis and summary of psychology, Principles of Psychology. The books were widely read in North America and Europe, gaining attention and praise from Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung in Vienna. James then moved away from experimental psychology to produce more philosophical works (he is credited as one of the founders of the school of American Pragmatism), although he continued to teach psychology until he retired from Harvard in 1907.