1886 - Market Building

On June 10, 1886, a crowd of two to three hundred people gathered on Hamilton’s Market Square to witness a cornerstone laying ceremony. The building to be erected was solely for the use of market dealers, primarily butchers.

The building had already been partially constructed and the crowd awaited the arrival of the local politicians at the speakers’ platform :

“Several aldermen were inside the walls and stood together in full view of the crowd, carefully inspecting the timbers overhead, and looking wise.”

The ceremony was scheduled to commence at 3 p.m., but, twenty minutes later, the mayor still had not arrived. As a drizzling rain was falling, the crowd began to grow impatient.

Finally, a straggling procession of civic dignitaries made their appearance, headed by City Messenger Smith carrying a silver trowel in a Moroccan case. Alderman Kenrick, chairman of the Markets, Fire and Police Committee, hurried stepped forward to put in place the box containing the documents and relics which were to be sealed within the cornerstone.

After the mortar was spread, Mayor McKay stepped forward to deliver the following address:

“A Newmarket building has for a long time been a great necessity, and this necessity is about to be met. The building will, I believe, be unexcelled in the Dominion as a place to be used exclusively for market purposes. There are other buildings used for market purpose which have cost more money than this one, but they are not used exclusively for market purposes.

“In the past, we have felt like keeping visitors away from our old market sheds; we were ashamed of them; but soon we will be able to take pride in showing strangers the place where our citizens do their marketing. Hamilton is progressing steadily and surely – not, perhaps, at as rapid a rate as some other cities; but when Hamilton takes a step forward, she never recedes from that position; she will never take an inferior position to the one she now occupies.

“This new building is a substantial proof of our progress and prosperity.

“Today is a particularly fitting day for the ceremony that I am about to perform. The first piece of ground used for market purposes in Hamilton was deeded to the city by the late Andrew Miller, and this is the fiftieth anniversary of the signing of the deed.

“The land deeded was a small space between Market and MacNab streets. After half a century, we vare about to take another step forward. I hope that this building, which has been well begun, will be successfully completed and will long stand a an ornament to the city and a convenience to our citizens.”

After Mayor McKay spread the mortar, the cornerstone was lowered and fixed into position. The mayor declared the cornerstone well and truly laid.

The ceremony then continued with a speech by Alderman Carruthers, who said :

“The old building has long been a disgrace to a city of the pretentions of Hamilton. The new one will be well-adapted for the purposes of public market, and will also be an ornament to the city. It is time for the old city hall to disappear also. It is little better as a city hall than the old market sheds are as market sheds. I hope, as I shall succeed the present  mayor , to lay the cornerstone of a new city hall.”

Alderman Moore also addressed the crowd, and stated his full agreement with the previous speaker that a new city hall was badly need in Hamilton:

“We ought to have building that will adequately represent the city’s industry, prosperity and progress. I may add, also, that I would be pleased to have the honour of laying the cornerstone of a new city hall when the time comes for the erection of such a building.”

The speeches by Aldermen Carruthers and Moore touching on their aspirations for the mayor’s job provoked Alderman Tom Brick to turn his remarks into a pure political stump speech:

“There’s soon to be a political contest coming on in this city, and both political parties will try to pull the working man. But I would have the workingmen know that neither the Conservative nor the Reform party have done anything for them in this country. They’re both alike. Little Mowat down at Toronto is tarred with the same stick as John A. Both the governments are the same, both robbers.

“Aldermen Carruthers and Moore said they aspired to be mayor of this town. Well, both these gentlemen will have to get broader views before they can get there. They will have to say that the workingman is as good as a millionaire. That’s the class of men that we shouldn’t want to keep in the ditch but should try to elevate.”

Alderman Brick kept on the same vein for a few minutes longer. When his speech was concluded, he had failed to say a word about the new market building.

By the middle of December, 1886, the new market building was nearly complete and ready for occupancy. The final touches consisted mainly of each lessee adapting his stall for his own particular needs.

On December 13, 1886, a Reporter for the Hamilton Spectator was given a tour of inspection through the new market building, calling it “a credit to the city and to Mr. Edwards, the architect.”

The interior of the building presented a fine, uniform appearance. The fronts of each stall were constructed with open wood work at the top, with strong wire guards which could be raised or lowered at will, and locked to the counter when the stalls were closed.

In front of each stall, strong swinging counters were provided. Each stall holder was permitted to put their names on their stalls, but there had to be uniformity of colors and styles of lettering.

The beauty of the building’s design was augmented by stained glass windows above the doors at each end and over the side entrance.

The new market building was not completely satisfactory to the stall holders. Because the floor was concrete and no drains provided, the butchers, in particular, were loud in their complaints. One stall holder, interviewed about the situation, said “there were some men who were never satisfied with anything, and these, of course, ain’t satisfied, but the sensible men are well pleased with their new quarters.”

The new market building was formally opened for the public on Saturday December 18, 1886, just in time for the Christmas rush.

A temporary platform was erected in the centre of the building and at 8 a.m., used it to deliver some remarks. He congratulated the Market, Fire and Police committee and its chairman, Alderman Kenrick, for the successful completion of such an excellent building.

The mayor also congratulated the architect and the contractors for their first class work in designing and erecting what he felt was the best building for market purposes in the province.

The mayor also expressed his hope that the merchants who had occupied the old market sheds would be as successful in the new building as they had been in the past.

As described in the Spectator, after the building was formally opened, there were “three cheers for the market building, three for the Queen, one cheer for Brother Blake (butcher, not politician), the lessees who were standing proudly in front of their handsome new stalls joining in the cheers, and then hurrying inside to attend to their customers.”

1885 - When I Grow Up

          The following  conversation among some Hamilton boys appeared in the Hamilton Spectator of July 24, 1885.

Some of reference made by the boys may have been well-known to Hamilton readers of the day but may need a little explanation for those not of that time or place.

Priests’ Field was a full block of then-vacant bounded by James, Young, Hughson and Forest. It had been purchased by the Roman Catholic Church as a possible location for a cathedral. .

General Grant is American Civil War General, and later United States.

President Ulysses S. Grant who have died the day before the article appeared.

“Mash one de Queen’s daughters” meant to court and marry a daughter of Queen Victoria.

General Middleton was Major-General Frederick Middleton who at the time was leading the troops in the Northwest Rebellion.

Hanlan refers to Ned Halan, a very famous athlete of the day, a rower.

Finally, the Clippers were one of Hamilton’s professional baseball teams of the day.

“When it grew too dark to see the ball, the boys who had been playing on the ‘priests’ field’ last evening, sat down on the grass nursed their feet, and talked. Said one of them, a boy in knickerbockers: “Say, it must be great to be a man like General Grant, and have such a fuss made over you when you die.”

        “Wot difference ‘ud it make to you wot dey say about you after you wuz dead?’ quiered a young red-headed philosopher.” I’d like to mash one de Queen’s daughter like dat prince feller, and marry her, an’ live widout workin’ and have a soft time.”

          “I’d like to run a candy store,” ventured very small urchin, with a very small voice. “I’d give ‘em away to the boys free.”

          Then each boy confessed what he’d like to be when he “grew up.” One said he’d like to “build houses” like his father; another that he would prefer above all things to be an ice cream manufacturer; another that he’d like to run an excursion boat; another that he would be pleased to be Governor-General; another chose Hanlan as his model, and one sturdy urchin remarked that he wanted to be “a great general like, Gen. Middleton.”

          A little apart from the group sat a bare-footed youngster with a very dirty face and unkempt hair that protruded through the broken crown of his straw hat. With a defiant air, he smoked a cigar stub that he found on the sidewalk, and had lighted with infinite difficulty. He took no part in the conversation, but sat silently pulling up the grass with his toes, and expectorating copiously through his closed teeth. At last, one of his comrades turned to him differentially and said, “Say, Slithery, what ‘ud you like to be when you grow up?”

          It was beneath Slithery’s dignity to reply at once. Without giving any token that he heard the question, he took two or three long draws at his cigar stub, blew the smoke slowly upwards, expectorated freely, and then, closely inspecting the half-inch of a stub, regretfully threw it away. During the process Slithery’s comrades watched him admiringly, and waited patiently for his answer. He was plainly an oracle among them. Their suspense was at length relieved. Slithery deigned to speak. He said, contemptuously: “Yous fellers is chumps. You don’t know nuthin’ – none of you don’t. When I grow up, I want to be manager of de Clippers or else a boss pitcher, and pitch double curves – dat’s wot I’m goin’ to be.”

          Having thus delivered himself, Slithery slid down the little slope to the sidewalk, and walked away whistling shrilly through his teeth and trailing his baseball bat behind him. And each of the boys communed with himself for awhile and silently but deeply realized that Slithery had chosen the better part.”

Jamestown Weed - 1884

It was a very distressing afternoon for the Greening family of Hughson street north

On August 7, 1884, the five year son of the Greenings had been playing outside in the family’s back yard when he became in a distressed state.

The Spectator account of the incident follows:

“A number of children have died at various times, from eating stramonium, or, as it is more familiarly known, the Jamestown weed, which grows in almost every backyard, on commons and in valleys. The only wonder is that the disastrous results are not more frequent, as plenty of children have an unfortunate habit of chewing indiscriminately at the grasses and weeds growing in uncared for places. Yesterday afternoon, a bright little five year old son of Mrs. Greening, of Hughson street north, came home with his face flushed, swollen and feverish, his manner and actions indicating that he was quite delirious. His peculiar appearance and actions were not noticed at first, but so soon as the mother did observe them, she sent at once for Dr. Woolverton, who came immediately, and seeing that the child had been poisoned, administered antidotes, and did everything in his power to save the little one’s life. The poison had already got into his system however, and at a late hour last night, he was lying in an unconscious state and not expected to recover. Dr. Woolverton said there was a possibility that he might pull through, but it was very doubtful. From a companion it was learned that the child had been eating stramonium in the yard during the afternoon. The poison in the weed is very violent, and parents should prevent its growing in their yards, as the little ones are liable to eat it at any time.”

Regular readers of the Spectator would have been relieved to read the following brief item which appeared in the Diurnal Epitome the day afternoon the report of the Jamestown Weed poisoning incident:

“The five year old son of Mrs. Greening who was poisoned through eating stramonium, is fortunately much better and Dr. Woolverton thinks he will recover.”

Shroudless Burial - 1884

       It was a scandal that just could not be covered up.

At 9:30 p.m., Sunday evening July 20, 1884, a lady named Mrs. Peter Bradt died in the Hamilton City Hospital.

A friend and neighbour George Searle went to the hospital to see if he could arrange a funeral for Mrs. Bradt, but hospital staff on duty were not co-operative, and gave no details as to the timing of the burial as the lady would be buried at the city’s expense in a pauper’s grave.

On Tuesday July 22, 1884, Mrs. Bradt was buried in the section of the Hamilton set aside for those of limited, or no means to purchase a plot, Potter’s Field.

Even at the cemetery, friends and family sensed something was wrong and that Mrs. Bradt had not been allowed the dignity of a proper burial. Before the coffin was lowered into the grave, it was noticed that the lid of the plain wooden coffin did not appear to be screwed down.

The lid was lifted by one of the deceased’s neighbours who was outraged by what he saw.

The body was being buried without a funeral shroud, the corpse was naked.

The management of the City Hospital refuses to address any questions about the matter and tried to let the matter blow over without any negative publicity.

Faint hope that was.

Reporters with both Hamilton city newspapers were informed about the matter and soon everyone in Hamilton did.

Finally on Monday August 4, 1884, a formal investigation into the incident was held.

The full Spectator report of that investigation follows:

“The investigation into the charges against the hospital management for allowing a corpse to be buried without being dressed was commenced at the city hospital last evening before the hospital  committee. There were present his worship Mayor Mason, Ald. Moore chairman, and Ald. McLagan, Stevenson, Blaicher, Allan and Bruce.

George Searle, the first witness, said : I live on Clarke avenue. I have to complain that Mrs. Peter Bradt was buried without a shroud on July 22. The lid of the coffin was not screwed down. The coffin was under a tree, and my little child lifted up the lid. Mrs. Bradt’s remains were perfectly nude. Mrs. Bradt died on Sunday night at 9:30. She was buried on Tuesday. When I saw her in the dead house, she had a sheet around her. The reason I came down to the hospital was in order that I might see about getting up a little funeral, but I could get no satisfaction as to time.

To Ald. McLagan – I did not use the spade to force the lid; there were no screws in the boards; Mrs. Bradt was my housekeeper. The caretaker told me that it was a sin to see anyone buried so, and that he would wait until I got some clothes. After I came back from the cemetery, I said to Dr. Woolverton that it was a shame to bury her so. He said “Why did you not marry her?” I said I could not marry her as she was a married woman. He said “You ought to have married her.” I said “I will let the newspapers know of this.” The doctor replied that I could go to hell and do it.

Dr. Woolverton here contradicted the statement, and asked to explain, but was requested to wait until called.

Mrs. Henry Searle was next called and said – I live on Ferrie street. The night before Mrs. Bradt’s death I brought her down a clean night dress. She asked me before she died to bring it. I left it in a drawer and told Mrs. Sloan it was to put on Mrs. Bradt when required. This was on Friday and Mrs. Bradt died on Sunday. I next saw her at the dead house. She had nothing on her except a sheet. I asked how it was she was not washed or dressed. A man – I think it was Mr. Young – said they did not wash or dress corpses until after the doctor had seen them. It was on Monday. I saw the corpse. I asked if I could get a dress and put it on her but he said no, that after  the doctor had seen her he would attend to it. I never got the clothes back which I took.

To Ald. Blaicher – At the time I brought the dress I did not tell any of the officials of the institution that I left them, but the officials knew that she had clothes. The woman I told was a patient. Mrs. Bradt took two suits of clothes with her when she went to the hospital. When Mrs. Bradt died she had a new wrapper, two petticoats, a shawl and a suit of underclothes. Mrs. Turner was with me when I saw the corpse in the dead house.

Dr. White said : I did not see the corpse. Dr. Woolverton telephoned me that Mrs. Bradt was dead, and asked me if I wished to hold a post mortem examination. When post mortem examinations are held it is customary for the corpses to be laid out on the table wrapped in a sheet. Post mortem examinations are sometimes made by the resident physician or by medical students. The records are made and kept.

Mrs. Elizabeth Turner, No. 2 Eliza street, said : I knew Mrs. Bradt who died in the hospital; saw Mrs. Bradt while she was sick, and again on Monday morning in the dead house. She was stripped, but had a sheet across her. She was not washed. Mrs. Searle was with me and asked if she might get some clothes put upon the corpse. I was with Mrs. Searle when she brought Mrs. Bradt a night dress and chemise. When Mrs. Searle brought  the clothes, she left them on the bed and did not tell any one about them. The man in the dead house said the corpse would be dressed after the doctor had seen it, if there were any clothes belonging to the deceased. Mrs. Searle told him that there were clothes in the drawer. Mrs. Bradt went by the name of Mrs. Searle.

Mr. Young, an attendant, said it was customary to wash patients after death and take them to the death house wrapped in a sheet. I saw the corpse of Mrs. Bradt washed on Sunday evening by one of the nurses. On Monday two women went to see her. They said they had permission from the doctor to go in. They asked about her being washed and dressed. Mrs. Bradt was clean but was not straightened because it was impossible to get her limbs straight. I usually dress corpses the day after death. I told the woman who offered to dress her that I would dress her after the doctor had seen her. They told me that there was clothes for her in the hospital, but did not say where. I made no inquiries about the clothes as I do not generally dress female corpses. He did not tell me anything about this one. I never knew of a case where anyone was buried without a shroud on. I was uptown on a message for the doctor when the corpse was taken away. The first I knew of the corpse without a shroud on was by hearing the patients talk of it after Mr. Searle had been to the hospital. I did not believe it.

Mr. Blachford, undertaker, said : I have the contract for burying all patients from the hospital; have had it for about five years. I do not provide shrouds. We place the corpses in coffins if such is not already done. We usually bring the coffin down just in time for the funeral. The corpses are generally clothed before we arrive. I have never known corpses to be buried naked except Mrs. Seale or Mrs. Bradt. That was on July 22. My assistant and myself put the corpse into the coffin. It was in a decomposed state. Mr. McMichael pointed out the body to us. It was pinned in a sheet. We took it out of the sheet and put it in the coffin without speaking to Mr. McMichael about it. The body was so discomposed that I considered it best to remove it as it was. The body was too much composed to be handled, and to be put into the coffin had to be lifted in the sheet. The lid of the coffin was firmly screwed on and I do not know how it got opened. I did not say that a man was drunk at the grave but at the hospital. I did not go to the cemetery with the corpse.

John Howick, Mr. Blachford’s assistant, said : I buried the corpse of Mrs. Searle. It was buried naked. I never knew a corpse to be buried naked before.  Mr. Blachford and I screwed the lid on. The body was clear from the lid and could not press it open. When I got to the cemetery, Mr. Craig told me to leave the corpse beside the grave till he finished burying another corpse. I did so, lifting the coffin out of the hearse by myself. When I left it there was no one around; the lid was still firmly on, and I do not believe that a child could open it.

Alexander Craig, caretaker of the cemetery, said : I buried the corpse of Mrs. Bradt or Searle – she went by the name of Searle. The lid seemed to be firmly on. When I was going to get some men to help me I saw Searle going into the free grave yard. When I went back I met Searle who told me that the coffin lid was loose and the corpse was in a nude state. The screws projected above the coffin lid and must have been raised in some way either by the lid being pried up or by some one trying to lift the coffin by the cover. I knew of one other case where a body was buried in a nude state; it was in last May. Searle  was very much excited but was not under the influence of liquor. I made no remark to Mr. Searle about getting clothes and did not offer to keep the body till Searle got the clothes.

Mrs. Pringle, night nurse, said : I remember Mrs. Searle. She died at 9:10 o’clock Sunday July 20. I washed the corpse and Mr. Young and Mrs. Steward took it away. I washed the entire body.

Mrs. Eby, day nurse in the women’s ward, said : Mrs. Searle brought two night dresses with her to the hospital. I knew nothing of Mrs. Searle’s burial. I found a parcel in Mrs. Searle’s drawer, but did not open it, as I had received no instructions as to what it contained. Never  knew a patient to be buried without being properly dressed. The porter generally dresses the patients, except when it is done by friends. He applies to the nurses for clothes if they are not supplied. The parcel is still my care. I always take charge of the clothing which patients bring in a put in the wardrobe. I take a record of all effects and the steward takes the list for my book.

Mr. McMichael, steward, said : I never knew a corpse to be buried naked from the hospital. I remember when Mrs. Searle died. I and the porter carried the body from the ward to the morgue. I never saw the body. The undertaker usually puts the corpses in the coffins. I was at the morgue when the undertaker came to get the corpse., and told him which one to take. I did not know that the corpse was put into the coffin naked. Corpses are always dressed in a shroud. I saw the sheet pinned around the corpse, although it is generally thrown over the body after the clothing is put on.

A long discussion here arose as to the duties of the nurse and steward of the hospital, and as it promised to lead to a review of the entire by-law as well as an investigation into the duties of the officials of the institution, Mr. Blaicher objected to the chairman investigating the duties of Mr. McMichael, and asked that the committee keep to the main question.

Dr. Woolverton was next called, he said : I never knew a corpse to be buried without being dressed properly. I heard that Mrs. Searle was buried without being dressed. Mr. Searle came down and told me, I said, I did not think it was so, to which he replied that he knew it was so as a child had seen it. I again said I did not believe it to be so, but would see about it. I asked him why he did not come and see me about her. I did not tell him to go to hell, although he was very insolent. He said he would put it in the papers, and I said he could do as he pleased about that. I made inquiries at the hospital, but no one seemed to know anything about it. The next day I told the porter to ask Mr. Blachford about it. He did so and told me that Mr. Blachford said it was so. I asked Mrs. McMichael, but she said it was the nurse’s duty to see that the body was properly dressed and delivered to the undertaker. In case of post mortem examinations I always instruct the porter to wash the body. If there is no post mortem, the body is left up after being dressed until the undertaker takes charge. It is the nurse’s duty after a death to hand the patient’s clothes over to the steward, unless some friends claim them. On the day of the funeral, I instructed Mr. McMichael to look after the funeral. The porter was uptown at the time of the funeral. I did not send, but someone must have.”

The inquest ultimately found no one to blame for the incident and no penalties or reprimands were assigned to anyone at the hospital or the cemetery as a result of the unfortunate occurrence.

In the court of public opinion, however, there were many findings of guilt. Even in Toronto, the case was reported with damaging comments about the management of the Hamilton City hospital.

A poem on the case was published in the Toronto World:

.

"Owed – By the Managers and Officials of Hamilton City Hospital”

J. Keyelle in Toronto World

She was only a woman, hardworking and poor,

Who, in the long feud with the wolf at the door,

Was beaten. At last, by sickness o’erborne,

She crawled to the hospital n’er to return.

What matter – now death has her fast I his clutches,

Dump her into the coffin – who cares for such wretches?

Naked came she to earth, naked let her go,

We’re believers, and go by the scriptures, you know.

Bare was the mute face, bare the soft female frame,

Not a rag once spread o’er her for pity or shame;

Thrown in like a dog, in the rude box they made her,

With the lid loose above – in the field thus they laid her.

Was there no one around, fifteen cents could have spared,

For three yards of cotton, at five cents a yard?

Just to swathe the poor body that so late was – a woman;

For though she was poor, unlike you, she was – human.

God! Are there no Christians in Hamilton “town,”

Must economy so your best feelings grind down,

That the poor, who through life are by poverty tried,

Must of a Christian burial too be denied?