McInnes Fire - 1879

“A public calamity has befallen Hamilton; a disaster from which the city will not recover in a day. Never in the history of the city has there been witnessed such a conflagration as raged for nearly three hours last evening; never before has so much valuable property been destroyed.”

Hamilton Spectator. August 2, 1879

It was about a quarter to six on Friday evening, August 1, 1879, when the cry “McInnes Block’s on Fire!” was heard in the vicinity of King and John streets in downtown Hamilton.

Within minutes, the men from the nearby fire station were at the scene, but already the flames were shooting high into the air. Soon, the building was completely engulfed in flames.

The McInnes building, erected in 1856, was a handsome, four storey warehouse, whose external walls were built of Ohio free stone.

The Spectator noted that the block was an ornament to the city and its destruction is little short of a public loss.”

Running the whole length of the west side of John street, from Main to King streets, the McInnes building contained within its walls the warehouse of the D. McInnes dry goods company, as well as premises for Messrs. Furner, Livingston and Company’s wholesale and retail dry goods business, and offices for the Bank of Hamilton and the Hamilton Provident and Loan Society.

Although there was some delay in getting adequate water pressure, the fire department was soon able to play nine streams of water on the building, but to little or no effect: “in an incredibly short time, there was not an ignitable article in the structure which was not in flames. As the roof fell in, and floor after floor collapsed with a terrible crash, immense volumes of sparks and some large pieces of burning timber and wooden material were wafted over the city by the wind, igniting a few structures, and placing others in the most imminent danger.”

It seemed that only was the McInnes building doomed, but there was a real possibility that the flames could spread throughout Hamilton’s downtown core.

As described by a reporter at the scene, thousands of spectators flocked to the vicinity of the fire;

“They seemed not to care for the inconvenience of being nearly suffocated with the large volumes of smoke which were wafted from the burning structures, and the fact that many had holes burned in their clothes with the flying burning cinders, or drenched with shifting hose, appeared to be regarded as a small price provided they could established themselves sufficiently near the theatre of excitement.”

The excitement was heightened even further when the Dixon Brothers’ store, across John street from the McInnes building fell prey to the flames.

The Spectator reporter learned that a large quantity of fireworks and gun powder was stored in that premises :

“About 7 o’clock a startling fusillade burst from the store, which caused a general scatter of the crowd. The reports resembled skirmishing firing by a body of infantry, with now and then a louder report as if of a regular cannon. It was kept up for a considerable time, pretty variegated flames being thrown out at intervals.”

The high winds, which prevailed during the height of the blaze, carried burning cinders over great distances.

Even at the Beach strip, far across the waters of Burlington bay, cinders fell in such quantities as to blacken the earth.

Closer to the fire, the wind-blown cinders were much more dangerous in effect.

The recently constructed Larkin Hall on John street north had a narrow escape from the fall out of the McInnes fire. Smoke was noticed pouring from its upper floor, but a score of volunteers worked diligently to save the new building’s roof.

The British Methodist Episcopal Church, at the corner of John street north and Rebecca street, was less fortunate. Smoke was also seen billowing from its roof, but by the time water could be directed on the building, the fire had made such headway that it was impossible to check the flames before the entire building had been gutted.

Unfortunately for the members of the British Methodist Episcopal Church, its minister, Reverend O’Banyon, a large portion of the congregation as well as most of the negro population of Hamilton, had gone to St. Catherines for the celebration of the anniversary of the West India Emancipation.

When it looked as if the large premises of the Sanford, Vail and Bickley company, at the southwest corner of King and John streets, were in danger of being lost to the spreading flames, efforts were made to save its stock.

As described in the Spectator;

“Windows were drawn up on every flat, and clothing in all its various stages of manufacture was dashed to the pavement below, from which it was collected by hosts of volunteers who assisted to pile it into wagons right heartily. Bales of cloth were also dropped from the storerooms, and several of those employed in gathering them up had narrow escapes from being injured by the falling bales.”

By nine p.m., the fire was under control, although the firemen remained at the scene all night, pouring water on the smoldering embers. As daylight broke, the interior of McInness building was a mass of ruins while the exterior stone walls remained standing.

The McInnes building had been lighted by gas, and the gas pipes throughout the building had been melted.

However, the main gas pipe entering the gutted building was still intact, and the gas it carried continued to burn, tainting the atmosphere near the ruined structure.

Shortly after 7 a.m., three employees of the gas company, James Ivory, John Nibbs and Robert Seymour, were sent into the basement of the burned-out building to plug off the main gas pipe. The location of the pipe was in the vicinity of the main entrance to the building off John street.

As the three men began to remove debris in order to access the gas pipe, the whole John street wall lurched, then collapsed, with a terrible crash.

Several other men working in and around the building had narrow escapes from being hit by the falling wall.

For s short time, the Spectator reporter noted, the three gas company employees were not missed:

“It was asserted by one man that he had seen Ivory immediately after the tumble down, and this led to the belief that, mysterious as was their disappearance, the men might have gone to work in some other part of the city.”

Mr. Littlehales, manager of the Gas company, accompanied by several of his employees, set off in rigs to look for the men, and for several hours a diligent search was made for the missing employees.

Finally, the agonizing conclusion was reached that the men must have been trapped by the falling wall.

Hamilton City Council was hastily convened for the purpose of authorizing the firm of Hancock and Addison with the task of tearing down the walls which were remaining erect.

While engaged in removing the debris from the area where the three gas company men were believed to be buried alive, another catastrophe took place.

About midnight, the contractors hired to remove the debris of the fallen wall began to erect a derrick for use in lifting out the heavy blocks of stone.

A few hours later, about 4:30 a.m., when everything was ready for the operation to begin, James Hancock, using a ladder, climbed to the top of the derrick in order to oil the machinery.

Hancock had barely reached the top of the derrick when it fell over with a crash. Hancock was hurtled violently into the ruins of the burned out building, where he hit his head against a large block of stone, fracturing his skull. He was taken to his home on Locomotive street, and, although given full medical attention, Hancock died as a result of his injuries.

The following day, Fire Chief Aitchison organized an operation with the purpose of pulling down the biggest of the still-standing walls.

A small rope was thrown through a window on the fourth storey near the centre of the wall. To this small rope, a larger rope was attached.

Shortly after 1 p.m., everything was in readiness for what the Spectator reporter termed “the grand pull” :

“About 200 men caught hold of the rope, and pulled with a hearty good will, the line being taken a way down John street. The wall swayed backwards and forwards in a most alarming manner, at one moment threatening to fall outwards, and, at the next, inwards. At last a compromise was effected, the wall falling with a terrible crash inwards, and the cornice outwards. As the structure fell, an immense cloud of dust completely beclouded the entire neighborhood for several minutes, enveloping the hundreds of spectators who had assembled to witness the novel proceedings.”

It was not until Tuesday August 5, 1879 that the bodies of the three gas company employees were located. The bodies were found under the sidewalk, near the gas pipe at which they had been working. The heavy blocks of stone had fallen through the sidewalk, crushing the victims.

After the bodies were removed from the ruins, a coroner’s jury was sworn in. The jury proceeded to view the corpses at the King William street morgue.

The Spectator reporter who accompanied the jury to the morgue was shocked by what he saw:

“The bodies presented an appearance to those who viewed them which they affirmed they never desired to look upon again. The features and bodies were bruised, burnt and scorched almost out of human resemblance.”

The afternoon after the discovery of the bodies, there was a public funeral procession for all four men who died in the aftermath of the McInnes building fire.

As described in the press, the procession had a profound impact on those who viewed it :

“Never since the Desjardins Canal accident, when Hamilton, in conjunction with adjoining places, was draped in mourning, have the streets presented a more melancholy and suggestive spectacle when the four men who lost their lives in the ruins of the burned out district were consigned to their last resting place. And never, perhaps, before was more genuine sorrow exhibited than on the occasion of these obsequies.”

The final chapter of the McInnes fire story was written at the coroner’s inquest into the deaths of the gas company employees, held in the City Hall.

Thomas Littlehales, manager of the Gas company was sworn in as the first witness. He informed the jury that there was no way to shut off the leaking gas, except by going into the building. He denied that he had ordered the men to enter the ruins of the building.

The second witness, John Eastwood, confirmed Littlehales’ story by testifying that he had heard Littlehales tell Ivory, “on no consideration go in the building, Jimmy, while there is any danger.”

After testimony from several other witnesses, the jury returned the following verdict :

“That the three men came to their deaths by falling upon them the eastern wall of the McInnes block, whilst endeavoring to cut off the gas from the burning building. The jury has ascertained that Ivory was street foreman in the employ of the Gas Company and had Seymour and Nibbs in his charge, and that he was warned on the night before his decease against entering the premises whilst they were unsafe. The jury regret that the Gas Company have not provided means for cutting off connection with their supplies without entering the premises which may be in dangerous condition.”

Larkin Hall (Later Treble Hall)

“In the midst of the grumbling incident on the flat state of commercial affairs, caused by the policy of the late Administration, there was one gentleman at least who had good hopes for the future, and that was Mr. H. J. Larkin, late Dominion emigration agent in Dublin.”

                                                Spectator. July 15, 1879.

On July 15, 1879, the Hamilton Spectator ran an article about a recently-completed brick building on the east side of John street, just north of King street.

The new structure had been called Larkin Hall, in honor of its developer, Mr. Henry J. Larkin.

Three stories in height, with a fine, mansard roof, Larkin Hall, according to the Spectator, “decidedly improved the appearance of the street.”

Hamilton’s own James Balfour was the architect of Larkin Hall. His design was an accommodation of the various uses Mr. Larkin had in mind for the various floors of the building.

On the ground floor were spaces for four separate stores, each with its own plate glass windows on the street side, and each with separate cellars with cement floors.

On the second floor, space for four offices was provided, and as described in the article, the offices “were such as might be occupied by a king, presenting a light and cheerful appearance, with abundance of provision for keeping up a stock of light and fresh air, and supllied with wash hand basins and other conveniences.”

The third floor was “a commodious hall, for concerts, public meetings, theatres, etc.” and was capable of seating 400 people. The hall was well-lighted by large windows both on the west and east sides of the hall, as well as four quadrangular sky lights in the ceiling.

The hall on the third floor was an excellent assembly room for mid-sized audiences. In case of fire, the hall could be cleared quickly: “the stairs leading to it, give ample room for a large assemblage to disperse in the shortest possible time.”

The opening event at the Larkin Hall assembly area was a free concert on July 15, 1879. The Sacred Philharmonic Society chorus was asked by Mr. Larkin to perform with a view of testing the acoustic properties of the hall.

The construction of Larkin Hall was seen by many in Hamilton as a symbol of the feeling of progress and prosperity that had swept over the city since the National Policy had been introduced to encourage Canadian industry.

The Spectator hoped that the addition of Larkin Hall to the city’s stock of impressive buildings would “encourage other capitalists to expend their wealth in improving and embellishing the city as Mr. Larkin has so successfully done.”

During Hamilton’s late Victorian era, the Larkin Hall assembly room was the location of many memorable events, including in the summer of 1882, the first Hamilton appearance of the Salvation army.

Late in the summer of 1882, posters were put up all over the city announcing the first Hamilton meeting of the Salvation Army to be held at Larkin Hall. In black lettering on yellow paper, the poster boldly informed the public that “The Salvation Army Is Coming!”

Larkin Hall was filled to capacity with curiosity seekers, eager to witness the Salvation Army’s novel, and energetic, methods of spreading the good news of the gospel.

Before the scheduled starting time of the meeting, Salvation Army Captain Freer attracted considerable attention by marching his band of followers around Gore Park. Both Captain Freer and his troops shouted out declarations of their faith and purpose as they marched along.

Joseph Tinsley who witnessed the initial appearance of the Salvation Army on the streets of Hamilton wrote in the Herald many years later that the captain “shouted and sang, and his followers gave vent to boisterous exclamations. Someone standing by said, ‘Oh, come along, he’s full.’ A similar expression was made in the apostle’s time with this distinction – instead of using the word ‘full’ the listeners said ‘come along, they are filled with new wine.’ ”

Inside Larkin Hall, Tinsley wrote that “the goings on were as good as a circus.”

 However, not everyone who attended the meeting made fun of the Salvationists, Tinsley noting that “some who came to scoff, and stayed to pray.”

Many were so moved by the meeting that they took the opportunity to declare their sins publicly. Thomas Stout who, since he had run away from home as a boy, had led what Tinsley called a “fast life … but he was the first to run the gauntlet of ridicule and became the first Salvation soldier in Hamilton.”

On January 17, 1883, Larkin Hall was the site of Hamilton’s first cake walk. As described in the press, “a cake walk is something new in this city, but it is a very interesting and amusing performance.”

A large crowd, consisting mainly of those, in the Spectator’s words, “of the colored persuasion,” gathered to witness the event.

The purpose of the gathering, chaired by Rev. Mr. Roberts, of the British Methodist Episcopal Church, was to raise funds to pay off that church’s debt.

After an introductory musical entertainment, the side benches of the hall were removed to make room for the walkers.

Each “walker” would pay an entrance fee of ten cents, and when the music began, the walker could choose any lady in the hall to walk with him.

Three judges, including Mr. Larkin, were selected to choose the most graceful pair of walkers and to award them the first prize.

A Times reporter in the hall wrote that there was “a magnificent three storey cake placed on the stage within sight of the contestants and the audience. This was the prize for the pair who would move the most gracefully around the hall.”

When the organ struck up the cords of the popular song, “The Girl I Left Behind Me,” the couples walked around the hall.

Mr. W. E. Pearman and his partner were the most outrageous of the walkers, with Pearman described by the Times man as “swinging his shoulders and turning out his toes in a comically exaggerated manner. His performance captured the fancy of many of his friends in the crowd, several of whom shouted out, ‘Pearman grabs the buns!’ ”

After eight laps around the hall, three couples were told to sit down and the remaining couples were asked to promenade around the large room a few more times. The winning couple, James Talbert and Miss Wilson, was then chosen to be the winners.

The cake walk was a great success, and the audience was satisfied with the decision as to the winning couple. According to the Times reporter who stayed to the end, “the cake walking lasted till eleven o’clock, after which there was a general bun feed.”

In early January, 1888, many rather unusual posters were nailed on several telegraph poles in Hamilton’s downtown area.

These posters, written on mourning paper, and encased in frames draped with mourning cloth, announced a public meeting to be held in Larkin Hall.

At the meeting, noted evangelical preacher, Mr. J. I. Best, was prepared to preach “the funeral sermon of the devil.”

Although the January 16, 1888 meeting was scheduled to begin at 8 p.m., by 8:20 p.m., Mr. Best had yet to put in an appearance.

The assembled crowd, consisting of about 50 young men and boys, began to get restless.

An unidentified man took the stage to apologize for the speaker’s tardiness, and then the wait continued.

The crowd entertained itself by singing “John Brown’s Body,” Later, a young man helped to relieve the monotony by playing his harmonica.

Finally, Mr. Best arrived, carrying a lamp in one hand, while, in his other hand, he brought in a bundle of documentary evidence to substantiate his contention that, indeed, the devil had died.

After opening the meeting with a prayer, Best addressed the crowd, calling the present age a time of joy because Jesus Christ had disposed of man’s greatest enemy, Satan.

Just as Mr. Best warmed to his subject, some mischievous boys turned off Larkin Hall’s supply of gas, plunging the assembly room into darkness.

Mr. Best tried to continue with his address, but the uproar was so uncontrollable that he was compelled to close the meeting, sending the agitated crowd down the stairs, and back out onto the streets.

Larkin Hall would be the scene of many, many entertainments, lectures, public meetings, debates and other events until the turn of the century when it’s name was changed to Treble Hall and the old assembly hall was subdivided into apartments.

Baptist Church - 1879

In the May 23, 1879 issue of the Hamilton Spectator, an announcement was published giving the time and date of the corner stone laying ceremony planned for Hamilton’s new Baptist Church.

The church, already being constructed at the corner of James street south and Jackson street, was, in the opinion of the Spectator writer, expected to be “a monument to the enterprise of the congregation and an ornament to the city.”

The ceremony was to be held at 11 a.m. on the Queen’s Birthday holiday, Monday May 26, 1879. The corner stone was to be ceremonially laid by a former Canadian prime minister, the Honorable Alexander Mackenzie, who was also asked to deliver a speech on the occasion.

The site selected for the new Baptist Church was an ideal location, but the lot was rather shallow for the size of the church being planned.

The lot, the Spectator described, was only 115 feet from front to back : “with this disadvantage, and the fact of a spacious church being required, the architect had to put forth his powers to accommodate the congregation conveniently, and, at the same time, to give the building a thoroughly ecclesiastical and artistic treatment. This he evidently has done with a master hand, subordinating the various parts to the grand whole and harmonizing them with one another, preserving an admirable proportion throughout.”

The exterior of the new Baptist church was designed to be particularly impressive: “with its solid walls, bold shadowy projections and recesses, fine clerestory and stately tower.”

The church’s tower was designed to compliment the existing structures in the neighborhood of the new church: “it will be considerably larger than the neighboring tower of St. Paul’s church, although the spire of the latter attains a higher elevation. Care has been taken in designing the tower of the Central Baptist church, so as not to mar the effect of the spire of St. Paul’s, and at the same time giving the former a striking character of its own.”

A temporary flooring had been laid down in the partially-constructed building to accommodate the dignitaries assembled for the corner stone laying ceremony.

The opening hymn was heartily sung by the large audience, feeling that the lyrics expressed well their sentiments for the new church:

“Builder of mighty worlds on worlds,

    How poor the house must be,

 That with our human, sinful hands,

    We may erect for Thee.

 O Christ, Thou are our Corner Stone,

     On Thee our hopes are built;

 Thou are our Lord, our Light, our Life,

     Our Sacrifice for Guilt.

 In Thy blest name we gather here,

      And to Thine honor raise,

 An earthly temple on this stone.

      To echo to Thy praise.

 Peace be within its sacred walls,

      Prosperity be here.

 Long smile upon thy people, Lord,

       And evermore be near.”

Rev. P. Hope, of Beamsville, read the lesson, followed  by Rev. Dr. Burns who led a prayer described in the Spectator as “earnestly pleading for the safe completion of the structure and the prosperity of this and all other churches having the spread of the gospel in view.”

Deacon W. J. Copp, chairman of the Building Committee, was the next speaker and he gave the following outline describing the development of the new building:

“In the building of churches, there are many difficulties to encounter, and although the Baptist congregation have long delayed the erection of a new place of worship, they had surrounded by difficulties. The first was ways and means, but they have been encouraged, not only by the subscriptions of those of their members who were in good circumstances, but even the poorest had given their mite, and the committee felt encouraged. Then there was the difficulty of finding a suitable site and of agreeing on plans etc. They had no fewer than twenty designs before them, all sent in anonymously, and the committee had adopted almost unanimously that sent by Mr. Connolly. The church is of pure Gothic style. It has been modernized a little, and although it may not altogether please the architect, it had been resolved to put in seats of the circular description, as being the most comfortable. He had no hesitation in stating that the erection of a building in this neighbourhood would greatly beautify and add to the appearance of this part of the city. They must not, however, forget the great object for which the church is erected; “for except the Lord build the house, the laborers build in vain.” Unless the church is filled with the faithful followers of Christ, unless the Sunday school has earnest and true teachers, and the young hearts which assemble in the school are drawn out towards the Savior, and souls are saved, we shall utterly fail in the great work we are undertaking. The church is erected for the good of souls; and wee are supplicating today that the Lord will bless our efforts, and that many precious souls may be saved in this place.”

At this point, the following items were lowered into the corner stone : copies of the following newspapers (the Spectator, Times and Weekly Record of Hamilton, the Globe and Main of Toronto, and the Canadian Baptist), the Baptist Year Book for 1879, copies of the minutes of the last meeting of the Niagara Baptist Association, the hymn book compiled for the use of the Sunday school, a prize essay, two or three sermons published by the pastor, and specimens of the silver and copper coins of the Dominion.

Dr. Stewart read the following statement, which was also placed in the hermetically-sealed jar:

“The stone placed over the cavity in which the jar containing the document is found, was as the inscription indicates, by the Hon. Alexander Mackenzie, M. P. late Premier of the Dominion of Canada, and a member of the Baptist Denomination, on the 26^th day of May, A. D. 1879, being the day observed in the city of Hamilton as the Birthday of Her Most Gracious Majesty Queen Victoria; his Excellency the Marquis of Lorne being Governor-General of the Dominion of Canada; the Hon. D. A. Macdonald, Lieut.-Governor of the Province of Ontario; and J. E. O’Reilly, Esq., Mayor of the City of Hamilton. The building is erected for the use of the congregation worshipping in the Park Street Baptist Church, and is to be called  the “Central Baptist Church.” The present pastor of the church is Rev. William Stewart, D. D., who entered on his duties in April, 1874. The Deacons are P. W. Dayfoot, W. D. Booker, Thomas Mason, and W. J. Copp. The treasurer is D. E. Roberts and the Church Clerk William Herald. The Trustees are W. J. Copp, Charles Gurney, P. W. Dayfoot, and W. D. Booker. The members of the Building Committee are W. J. Copp, Chairman, St. Clair Balfour, Treasurer, W. D. Booker, Secretary, together with Messrs. P. W. Dayfoot, C. Gurney, A. Copp, D. E. Roberts, D. McDermid, Henry New, G. R. Roberts, John Sirrelle, J. H. Stone, R. George, P. L. Scriven, Wm. Herald, W. H. McElcheran, John Watt, J. F. Chamberlain, S. Woodley, M. Finch, together with the pastor and one or two others. The architect is Mr. Joseph Connolly, R. I. A. I. The principal contractors are Messrs. White and Stocks, masons, Mr. G. Sharp, carpenter, Ross Brothers, painters. Mr. Wm. Herald is Clerk of Works. The corner stone is a special donation from the firm of Hurd and Roberts. Subjoined will be found a brief historical sketch of the church.

“Previous to the year 1843, the Rev. Jos. Clutton and W. Rees, Baptist ministers, who are yet living, visited the village of Hamilton occasionally, and preached to the few scattered Baptists. There was no regular, however, till May 1843, when the late Rev. A. Booker, who had been fourteen years a minister in Nottingham, England, settled here. Services were at once established, and a church of ten members, two of whom are yet in fellowship with us, was organized on the 7^th of January 1844. At first, the meetings were held in the old Police Court, on King William street, and hen they were removed to the building known as Thornton’s School House. The church edifice on Park street was erected in 1846, enlarged in 1863, and again in 1871. In 1850, several members left to form a new organization, which was called the John street church and which re-united with the parent in 1857. In March of that year, the Rev. A Booker was killed in the great railroad catastrophe at the Desjardins canal, near this city. Since that time, the following ministers have been pastors of the church: Rev. Messrs. J. Burke, J. Bates, J. Crawford, F. G. Brown, R. J. Wilson, G. Richardson and Wm. Stewart. The number of members in 1858, after the reunion of the two bodies, was 120; in 1874, it was 216, and at present is 325. The resolution to build a new place of worship was adopted in 1876; but more than a year was lost in negotiations for the purchase for the purchase of a church edifice offered to the committee. Eventually, however, the present site was purchased in June, 1878, and the contract let in October of the same year. The work was immediately commenced, and at the present dates, the walls are about half up. It is expected that the building will be finished by the end of the present year.”

Mr. J. B. Dayfoot then presented the Hon. Alexander Mackenzie with a silver trowel, on which was the following inscription:

“Presented to Hon. Alexander Mackenzie, M. P. on occasion of his laying the corner stone of the Central Baptist Church, Hamilton. May 26, 1879.”

The former prime minister replied that he was exceedingly obliged for the handsome gift, and that he was honored to be present on such an auspicious occasion.

The actual laying of the block cut of Ohio stone in the northeast corner of the structure was then completed, after which Mr. Mackenzie resumed his address to the assembled citizens.

Mr. Mackenzie told the crowd that he was regretful that the pressures of his public life left little time for work for the welfare of the Baptist church, of which he was a proud member.

Mr. Mackenzie replied to the critics who felt that it was of little importance whether churches be beautiful places of worship or mere plain structures in which to assemble: “surely it is not asking too much that we, who believe in and worship Him who is the Ruler and the Architect of the Universe should construct creditable places of worship. It is of great importance that our churches should be in no way inferior to the fine public buildings which have everywhere been erected throughout our land, and which have so much tended to elevate the public taste. Nothing was more depressing to him than to go into some parts of the country, where farmers were comfortably well off, and see the churches much inferior to the homes in which the farmers themselves live.”

The speaker then discussed the reasons why he was a Baptist. He felt it was nearer to the Scriptural idea of a Church than any other denomination. He welcomed the uniform liberty of action permitted by the Baptist church. Because the speaker believed in the non-interference of the State with the Church, the speaker welcomed the toleration of the Baptists: “he didn’t say that there were no Baptists who were narrow and intolerant; but he believed the body to be generally free from those faults.”

While professing his Baptist convictions, the speaker at the same time expressed his beliefs that there was room for all Christian denominations, and that in dealing with each other, people “should by no rivalry, which was contrary to the spirit of the Saviour’s teaching. It had been his lot during his public life to meet with men of all religious denominations, and he had had his views enlarged and broadened by intercourse with other men; and some of the most estimable of these were not Protestants but connected with the Roman Catholic church.”

Mr. Mackenzie pointed out that in the Old Country a great deal of intolerance prevailed partly because there was a State church: “the battle of equal rights to all denominations has been fought and won in Canada, and the humblest Church stands on as good footing as the largest Church in the land.

Mr. Mackenzie concluded wish a wish that when the new Hamilton Baptist Church was completed, it would enjoy abundant prosperity.

Mr. F. E. Kilvert was the next speaker.

“If Hamilton could be proud of her material advantages,” Kilvert said, “she could also boast of her churches. It might well be named ‘The City of Churches.’ Within the last ten years, most of our magnificent ecclesiastical structures had been built, and the present is a sign that this denomination is keeping pace with the general progress.”

His Worship Mayor O’Reilly said that it sometimes occurred to him that it would be a delightful thing if there was one spiritual belief but he then said, “no doubt their was an all-wise purpose in their having, whilst all seeking the same end, different methods of pursuing their spiritual welfare.”

The mayor congratulated the Baptists on “the auspicious commencement of their laudable work,” and expressed “his hope that the building would be successfully completed.”

The Hon. Adam Hope gave a number of reminiscences of early Hamilton and stated that when he came to Hamilton there were but two churches in the city. The speaker regarded the erection of so many magnificent churches as “the outcome of the healthy rivalry arising out of the voluntary principle. It would be a great misfortune if they had uniformity of faith, because the people would not have much incentive to progress.”

Adam Brown rose to offer neighborly congratulations to Dr. Stewart and the Baptist congregation of Hamilton. He fully agreed with the remarks of Mr. Mackenzie on the necessity of all being more tolerant in their religious views.

Mr. Brown said that he was glad that Hamilton was taking “the foremost ranks in the steps to put down intolerant rivalry of creeds.” He concluded by expressing his hope that the “noble edifice now under construction would be speedily brought to a successful completion.”

Rev. Dr. Stewart was the last speaker. He began by thanking all the previous speakers for their kind words. The pastor noted that while his church had never appealed for funds from those outside of the Baptist denomination, he had received a cheque for $100 from a gentleman not connected with the church.

Dr. Stewart said that he had heard a good deal about the voluntary system at the ceremony and told those present that “they would have an opportunity of showing whether they believed in it as they left by the gangway, where were placed two collection plates.”

With the singing of a verse of the national anthem, the corner stone laying ceremony for Hamilton’s new Baptist church were concluded.

At 3:15 p.m., September 10, 1879, a terrible accident occurred at the construction of the Baptist church.

John Sullivan, a labourer, was carrying stone by wheelbarrow to stone mason John Langdon, who was working on a scaffold sixty feet up.

As later described in the Weekly Times, Sullivan, becoming tired, “put down the wheelbarrow in such a sudden manner as to cause a jar, which, taken in connection with the weight on the scaffold, proved too much for the putlocks, and they first cracked, then broke, and twenty-four feet of the structure fell to the ground, a distance of sixty feet.”

Laborer John Sullivan fell, while still holding on to the wheelbarrow. One of the 70 lb. stones which Sullivan was carrying in the wheelbarrow struck him on the head, smashing his skull.

The Spectator reporter who had rushed to the scene of the accident noted that seconds after the scaffold had given way, the two men were “two helpless, bleeding masses of inanimate clay.”

At the homes of the men who had met such sudden, unexpected deaths, the scenes were heartrending.

John Sullivan lived on Catharina street, near the corner of Walnut, with his wife and six children, the youngest of whom was only eighteen months old.

Mrs. Sullivan was described by the Times reporter as being frantic with grief, “while the children mourned the loss of their breadwinner as only children can mourn for the departed.”

John Langdon’s wife was already in poor health, having given birth only a few weeks previously. The news of husband’s death was particularly hard for her to bear.

Both of Hamilton’s newspapers immediately declared that the accident was the result of defective scaffolding.

The Spectator described the manner by which the scaffolding in question had been put in place: “the scaffold was constructed in the usual way, a framework of poles forming the outer side, to which putlocks were stretched from the wall, and on these were laid a platform of planks.”

Immediately after the 24 section of scaffolding had given way, killing the two men, Dr. Algernon Woolverton, was called to the scene. He gave instructions that a coroner’s jury be summoned immediately.

At 5:30 p.m., the newly sworn in jury went to the scene of the accident, then went to view the bodies of the deceased.

At the coroner’s inquest, Messrs. White and Stock, the building contractors, came in for criticism. In the Weekly Times, it was noted that “both men were highly respectable, and said to be careful men, but the manner in which the scaffolding round the Baptist church has been constructed shows conclusively that somebody has blundered.”

After hearing considerable testimony, the coroner’s jury issued the following verdict:

“That the death of John Langdon and John Sullivan was caused by the breaking of a putlock used in the scaffolding, the same being defective, cross-grained and brittle, and not suitable for the purpose for which it was used. That sufficient care was not exercised in the selection of timber for the scaffolding, and we would recommend that a competent building inspector be appointed by the city to examine all buildings and scaffoldings hereafter in the city.”

By the first of December, a building inspector had not been appointed by the city, and only a church member, Mr. Joseph Herald, was overseeing the operations.

For some time, there had been rumors afloat that there were severe defects in the workmanship put into the construction of the Baptist church. From the Weekly Times it was suggested by some that “the foundations had sunk, others that the masonry was defective, and others that the church though presenting a handsome appearance was a mere shell.”

On Monday, December 1, 1879, the men employed on the building showed up for work at the usual time.

A man named Hannah, who had four men engaged in grading the site, detected sounds of crumbling and cracking emanating from the building and immediately ordered his men to pick up their tools and get away from the scene.

A few minutes later, Mr. George Sharp, who had the contract for the carpentry work at the Baptist church, entered the building to ascertain what danger might exist for the safety of his workmen, given the sounds which had been detected.

About 8:20 a.m., a large mass of material was heard to fall inside the church tower.

The news of the building’s imminent collapse quickly spread throughout the downtown. A large crowd had gathered Mr. Sharp, accompanied by a man named Wadland, entered the building.

As described in the Weekly Times: “when just as they got inside, a large mass fell and the latter gentleman retired. Mr. Sharp remained and appears to have escaped miraculously, for in another instant, the tower, walls and roof came down with a fearful crash. It was feared that a life had been lost, but all were relieved when Mr. Sharp appeared unhurt. The shocks and clouds of dust were great, and a sigh of relief escaped all present that though a thing of beauty was destroyed, yet no loves were lost.”

After the dust had cleared, it was evident that further collapses were possible, and a squad of policemen were ordered to surround the building in order the crowd, who, the Spectator noted, “many of whom seemed to be animated by a spirit of recklessness and would insist on pressing forward. The boys, especially, seemed to take great delight in stealing past and getting as near as they could, though they were repeatedly driven back.”

The Spectator reporter on the scene was shocked at the appearance of the building’s walls after the collapse: “ a glance at the standing portions of the wall and at the mass of stones on the ground revealed a state of things which deserves the severest condemnation. Instead of being firmly placed in good mortar, the stones composing the walls were laid in sand.”

The Hamilton Times in its editorial on the collapse of the Baptist church expressed the opinion that the incident highlighted the need for the appointment of a building competent inspector of public buildings: “supposing the Baptist Church to have been completed, and the collapse of the walls to have taken place whilst it was crowded with worshippers, who knows what sacrifice of life there might have been? The present seems a fitting time for those in authority to earnestly consider the matter, and to take such steps as shall, if possible, prevent similar accidents to those which have occurred in connection with the construction of the Baptist Church.”

In its lengthy editorial on the accident, The Spectator severely condemned the construction practices used in erecting the Baptist church: “looking at the crumbled mass one does not wonder how the walls gave way, but how they came to stand long enough to have the top stone put on them. Practical men who have been examining the building for several days past assure us that in many places they could remove the interior stones with their hands.”

The Spectator editorial writer demanded to know how such poor construction methods were allowed to be used in a public building. The public, the editorial writer insisted, had a right to be protected against such contractors: “it is appalling to think of such a disaster happening with the congregation in their pews. Had it occurred under such circumstances, we should have had to chronicle the loss of a good many hundreds of lives. Had there been people passing in front of it when it fell, instant death would have been their fate. These are rather serious  considerations to ponder over; they make the matter a public one and we cannot stop to spare anyone’s feelings in the recital of it.”

The person specifically singled out in the Spectator editorial was Mr. Joseph Herald, a piano manufacturer and a member of the Baptist congregation who was the inspector of the building’s construction, and a man who gave his superintendence for free as a contribution towards the erection of the church: “all who know him will admit that he is a thoroughly conscientious gentleman and a first class mechanic in his own line, but making pianos and building churches are widely different things, and require widely different kinds of knowledge and experience.”

As regards the contractors hired for the project, White and Stock of Wellington Square, the Spectator editorial writer could not find what he called “a shadow of excuse for them. If they are practical men at all, they willfully sinned against the rules of their calling. They knew that they were not doing honest work. If they are not practical men, then they are gravely culpable for undertaking what they did not understand, and did so at risk to others.”

The “spirit of cheapness” ruled those who were involved in the erection of the church, the Spectator editorial went on to say, “to that spirit the lives of two men were sacrificed in the falling of the scaffolding some time ago, and to that spirit, the building itself has now fallen a victim.”

Architecturally, the new church was to have been one of the finest ecclesiastical structures in the city, but “such buildings cannot be erected on the Cheap Jack plan. There is no royal road to fine buildings any more than there is to other things which are the best of their kind.”

The Spectator editorial writer then addressed the general desire for an inspector of buildings empowered by the municipal government.  Feeling that the self interest of the contractors should be more than enough to prevent them putting up buildings which could fall down. The municipal government of Hamilton could not easily afford paying for a municipal inspector of buildings: “Hamilton is not a New York or Philadelphia and must deny itself some of the conveniences which these larger places enjoy, because of their expense.”

Finally, the editorial writer for the Spectator warned the general public to not deal with building contractors based on the lowest tender alone: “it will probably suffice for the present to impress upon the public mind that when a contractor takes a contract at a price below what it can be honestly done for, he does not mean to do it honestly.”

In the weeks and months after the collapse of the Baptist church tower and walls, the congregation set about to raise further funds to have the walls rebuilt and the building repaired.

It was recommended that the tower should not be rebuilt.

Mr. John Webber was hired as the contractor for the building’s repair work. He was given full power, and as much money, as he needed to satisfactorily complete the building.

As described in the Spectator, “the reconstruction and finishing of the church was slowly proceeded with, everything being done with a view of thorough workmanship, even to the most minute details, and the result is that today the James Street Baptist Church building is a strong and handsome piece of architecture, having stood exposure to wind and weather for many months without suffering therefrom in any way.”

On Sunday, April 2, 1882, the long-suffering Baptist congregation of Hamilton for the first time occupied their new place of worship.