Middleborough Town Hall under Snow, 1920s

Soldiers & Sailors Monument, 1896

On May 30, 1896, Middleborough dedicated its impressive Soldiers' and Sailors' Memorial on the Town Hall lawn to the memory of the community's civil war veterans.  Though the initial proposal for the memorial was met with skepticism and concerns that the monument would be neglected in time, the Soldiers' and Sailors' Memorial has since become a focal point of both Memorial and Veterans' Day observances now held at the neighboring Veterans' Memorial Park.  At the time of its dedication to "the defenders of our country" in 1896, the Middleboro Gazette published the following brief history of the memorial's origins.

The first movement looking towards a soldiers’ memorial was soon after the close of the war, when the town made an appropriation of $1000 for a monument, but the matter was overshadowed by the urgent need of a new town house, and was disposed of on that account, and nothing ever came of it. The following item in the MIDDLEBOROUGH GAZETTE of June 9, 1866, perhaps best explains the final disposition of the affair: “A town meeting has been called for the 18th to see what action the town will take in regard to building a Memorial and Town Hall. The town has already voted $1000 towards building a monument, and it is found a much larger sum will be needed to erect a shaft that shall be at all honorable to our people. We are at the same time greatly in need of a decent town house. It is therefore proposed with great unanimity on the part of our heaviest taxpayers to drop the matter of a monument, and erect a good Town and Memorial hall. This building will in the end be much cheaper than to build both; and at the same time, its design as a memorial of the sacrifices of our citizen soldiers, will be secured.” It is evident that though the Town house was finally built, the memorial hall in connection with it failed to materialize.

The first written plea for a monument appeared in the columns of the GAZETTE, from the pen of that gifted writer, so well and favorably known by our townspeople, today, Miss Nellie Brightman, now of Boston, and was probably called forth by the action of the town in regard to the soldiers’ monument, and was published July 7, 1866.

It was an earnest appeal for a distinct soldiers’ memorial, and decried the idea of a combination of a Town and Memorial hall, as will be seen by the following extract: “Can we raise utility to so great a height that sublimity will not become ridiculous in the effort to descend to its level? Does not the idea of commemorating the great deeds of the brave soar beyond and above all thought of earthly use and convenience, carrying the mind away from business, amusements, and the gathering of hundred, onward to the glorious assemblage of our gallant thousands in celestial halls of light?”

We wish we might be able to reproduce the article entire, but the closing sentences are especially fine: “One objection to the shaft is that it will become defaced in time, and will be neglected. A hard commentary on the gratitude of future generations. Will children forget the brave deeds of their fathers? We are lower than the heathen if we cannot educate our children to look with awe and affection on the commemorative stone, and it is especially our duty, which neglected now will never be performed, to institute, theirs to perpetuate, this emblem of the soldier’s valor, and of events that called it forth. Are there ‘none so poor to do them reverence’ – the gallant boys, who full of hope and eager for the fray, left their beautiful village homes to return no more? Don’t give up the monument! Wait, work and hope, and in time see the glorious workmanship arise majestic and grand. Let the sun’s latest rays at his setting gild the half raised visor of the soldier’s cap, and as he slowly sinks behind the hills they loved, let his light play lovingly round the glistening steel of the bayonet, which in the hands of men we venerate, brought back sweet peace to our native land.”

The matter of a monument seems to have languished from this time on with faint attempts to revive it until about 1889, when the first committee was appointed to forward the work and was organized with John C. Sullivan, past Commander of Post 8, as chairman, and W. B. Stetson, then Commander of the Post, as secretary, and George H. Walker, treasurer. Sylvanus Mendall and Alvin C. Howes were the other members of the committee.

From the resignation of J. C. Sullivan and the death of the late George H. Walker, the committee was composed as follows: Alvin C. Howes, chairman, Warren B. Stetson, secretary, Sylvanus Mendall, treasurer, John N. Main and Jairus H. Shaw, which committee continued at the head of the movement. The following were added as a citizens’ committee to co-operate with them in 1894: Joseph E. Beals, Rev. M. F. Johnson, Rev. J. H. O’Neil, Rev. R. G. Woodbridge, Rev. George W. Stearns, David G. Pratt and George W. Stetson, Esq., and this number was augmented by the addition of six more members, Rev. W. F. Davis, George H. Shaw, Hon. M. H. Cushing, Sprague S. Stetson, Henry D. Smith.

Illustration:
"Soldiers Monument, Middleboro, Mass.", F. N. Whitman, Middleborough, MA, publisher, postcard, early 20th century.

Source:
“Soldiers’ Memorial”, Middleboro Gazette, May 30, 1896.

McKinley Memorial Service, 1901

On September 6, 1901, while visiting the Pan-American Exposition at Buffalo, New York, President William McKinley was shot by anarchist Leon Czolgosz.  McKinley survived the shooting for eight days before ultimately succumbing.  He died September 14, 1901.  In Middleborough, in the wake of the tragedy, a shocked and grief-stricken community assembled on Thursday, September 19, in Town Hall to memorialize McKinley in a moving and patriotic service.  The singing of "Nearer My God to Thee" as part of the memorial was a poignant reminder of McKinley's final moments.  The President is said to have spoken the opening lines of this favorite hymn as his final words.

For more about the McKinley assassination visit McKinley Assassination Ink, a comprehensive resource of primary and secondary materials on the event and its aftermath.

Views of Middleborough Town Hall, 1870s

Among the earliest extant visual images of Middleborough Town Hall are these two stereographic cards dating from the mid-1870s.  The views depict Middleborough Town Hall a short time after its completion and dedication in 1874.

Illustrations:

Middleborough Town Hall, stereographic cards, mid-late 1870s

Middleborough Town Hall Cupola

Since its construction in 1872-73, Middleborough Town Hall has settled to such a degree that it has thrown off the pitch of its iconic "cupola". The situation was first noted within a decade of the building's construction when efforts were undertaken to rectify the situation:

A recent examination of the cupola of the Middleboro town house, discloses the fact that it has settled from two to three inches on one side. To prevent damage to the building, which not many years ago was erected at a cost of over $50,000, it will be necessary to get the cupola back to place. [Old Colony Memorial, January 24, 1885, p. 4]

Accordingly, in the winter of 1885, repairs were made within the building's superstructure in order to realign the cupola over the building:

Workmen have straightened up the cupola of the town house, in Middleboro, and secured it in position. It was concluded it was thrown out of plumb by the settling of the building and not from effects of heavy gales. [Old Colony Memorial, March 12, 1885, p. 4]

Despite the best efforts of workmen in 1885, and later, the cupola has been continued to shift torsionally, essentially twisting under its own weight. Though the shift has been relatively minimal, it nonetheless remains noticeable to this day, and the tower sits slightly askew relative to the main building below.

Illustration:
Middleborough Town Hall Cupola, photograph by Michael J. Maddigan, May 27, 2006

Sources:
Old Colony Memorial, January 24, 1885, p. 4; March 12, 1885, p. 4.

Ghost Stories and Historical Fiction

Having accumulated information over the past several years relative to the life and work of regional architect Solomon K. Eaton, it was with a mix of interest and dismay that I read the recent article [“Ghost at Middleboro Town Hall May Be Former Architect, Says Investigator”] by Eileen Reece in the September 3 edition of the Brockton Enterprise. It is not the "ghosts" in this tale that are fanciful, but rather the reworking of historical facts which are widely reported.

The first historical error made in the case, and assuredly the most devastating, is the identification of Eaton based upon the recognition by a witness of a purported photograph of the architect. The photograph identified by the witness which is captioned “Solomon Eaton” and depicted on the Enterprise’s website is in fact not a photograph of Solomon K. Eaton, the architect, but rather of Solomon Eaton, Solomon K. Eaton’s father who was an inn keeper at North Middleborough. The photograph of the elder Eaton is taken from Thomas Weston’s History of the Town of Middleboro, Massachusetts (1906) which clearly identifies the subject of the photograph as Solomon Eaton both in the text and the index. Consequently, the witness in truth identified a person other than the architect as the “ghost haunting Town Hall”.

Secondly, the assertion that Solomon K. Eaton “was never given credit for his work” in designing Middleborough Town Hall is not supported by any evidence. While Eaton died on October 9, 1872, during the construction of Middleborough Town Hall, and completion of the building was overseen by Horatio Barrows as head of the town-appointed building committee, never was anyone other than Eaton credited as the architect. Newspapers at the time, including the Middleboro Gazette, Middleboro News, Plymouth Old Colony Memorial, New Bedford Evening Standard, New Bedford Daily Mercury, and others all cite Eaton as the architect prior to, during, and after the building’s construction. The Middleborough Town Report for 1873 records that Eaton was paid a large sum, including money on account with the executor of his estate, “for [building] plans”. Weston’s history unequivocally calls Eaton “the architect and contractor” of the building who “drew the plans for the town house.” There is not one source which labels Barrows as “architect” of the building in place of Eaton, and to suggest as much is contrary to all documentary evidence.

Finally, the supposition that Eaton’s plan for Middleborough Town Hall was altered by Barrows is also not borne out by the facts. A comparison of the works attributed to Eaton demonstrates without a doubt that Middleborough Town Hall as built is clearly derivative of Eaton’s earlier works, including the Elizabeth Taber Library at Marion (1872) and the State Normal School Building at Bridgewater (1871). Had Barrows altered the plans to such an extent as to make Eaton “unhappy” as is suggested, the building would not likely bear such a striking similarity to its predecessors, particularly the Taber Library. Further, at the time of Eaton’s death, a considerable portion of the work upon Middleborough Town Hall had been completed, so much so that Barrows would not have had an opportunity to alter the design to any great extent. The frame had been raised and the building was in the process of being boarded in, leaving Barrows little opportunity to alter anything but the interior layout which so closely resembles Eaton’s earlier works as to be attributable solely to him. And while Barrows did oversee the completion of the building in his role as building committee chairman, the day to day work (at least relative to the roof and tower, but probably for the entire structure) was directed by Middleborough contractor James P. Sparrow who was both more likely and more qualified to have suggested changes (if any) to Eaton’s design. Also, as head of the committee which contracted with Eaton to design then build the Town Hall, it is unlikely that Barrows would have agreed to hiring Eaton if he were so dissatisfied with the architect’s plans that he altered him the moment Eaton died.

Ironically, while the investigation of the paranormal seeks to claim for itself a rational, scientific foundation, its disregard for what are well-documented, easily verifiable, and readily available facts regarding the history of Middleborough Town Hall and the life of Solomon K. Eaton, only undermines the claim by that "science" to objectivity. Rather than being recognized (as he should) for his contribution towards fostering a uniquely New England architectural aesthetic regionally, Eaton has become the fodder for ghost stories and historical fiction.

Middleborough Town Seal

One of the most ubiquitous symbols of official Middleborough, emblazoning official documents, bills, financial statements, correspondence and town vehicles among other items, the Middleborough town seal was initially created in the late nineteenth century in response to a need for a seal with which to legally stamp official documents. Though no record has been left as to who first recognized this need, most probably it was the Town Clerk who also served as Treasurer and Accountant, and would have required such a device in their daily work. Consequently, a committee of townspeople was appointed in 1891 to investigate the matter and take action. Their report was heard the following year at the annual town meeting of March 7, 1892, following which the present seal, designed by Herbert S. Sylvester of Middleborough, was adopted.

Notice of the town’s adoption of the seal was carried in the Plymouth Old Colony Memorial of May 7, 1892, as well as a description of the seal, itself. “It is of circular form, bearing the word ‘Middleborough’ near the rim, with the town hall in relief in the centre, the words ‘Plymouth County, Mass.,’ are on either side of the relief and the words ‘Incorporated A. D. 1669.’” Undoubtedly similar notices appeared in both the Middleboro Gazette and Middleboro News at the time, though copies of these newspapers are no longer extant.

The choice of Middleborough Town Hall for the central object of the seal was indicative of the esteem in which the building continued to be held nearly twenty years following its construction. Built in 1872-73 and designed by Middleborough native Solomon K. Eaton, Middleborough Town Hall became a symbol of the community’s optimism during the post-bellum era when Middleborough was growing rapidly, adopting many modern advances, and passing from an agricultural to an industrial economy. For residents at the time, Middleborough Town Hall represented the community’s abilities and aspirations.

The use of Middleborough Town Hall on the Town Seal which has been in continual use for over a century has only further wedded the physical building with the town’s communal identity, and recent restoration of the structure demonstrates the special place which Middleborough Town Hall continues to hold within Middleborough.

Interestingly, the relief of Middleborough Town Hall employed on the seal differs slightly from the building as constructed, the seal depicting a cupola which is shorter and squatter than the actual cupola. This discrepancy may be ascribed to either an inaccurate artist’s rendering or the possibility that the seal represents the original architectural conception of the building which may have been altered at the time of construction. What is known is that the cupola of the structure, so distinctive and individual, has been a continual source of structural problems ever since its construction.

Following its adoption, the new town seal was used for official purposes, but did not make its most public debut until 1908 when it finally appeared on the cover of the annual town report of that year, where it would continue to be featured for the next fifty plus years. A modernized version of the seal was featured on the annual town report for 1944, though this use appears to have been a wartime aberration as it seems not to have been employed subsequently. Because of its relatively intricate design, Sylvester's original seal has not lent itself well to modern printing techniques and several reproductions of the seal during the late 1980s on the annual street listings and other documents appeared as little more than an obscure blob of black ink which failed to reproduce the seal's detail. As a result, a modified version which stripped away much of the fine work (and elegance) of the 1892 seal was created, and this has been employed on various documents since.

.

Illustrations:

Middleborough Town Seal, Annual Report of the Town of Middleborough, Massachusetts, for the Year Ending December 31, 1941 (Middleborough, MA: Town of Middleborough, 1942), cover.

Following 1908, the Town Seal was used to emblazon the cover of Middleborough's annual town reports and remained in use in this fashion until the mid-1960s when it was replaced by a line drawing of Middleborough Town Hall and later by photographs.

.

Middleborough Town Seal, Annual Report of the Town of Middleboro, Massachusetts, for the Year Ending December 31, 1944 (Middleborough, MA: Town of Middleborough, 1945), cover.

The version of the Town Seal appearing on the cover of the 1944 annual report appears to have been one of the few uses of this modified version of Sylvester's original design.

.

Middleborough Town Seal, contemporary version, c. 2009.

Though this "cleaned-up" version of Sylvester's design lacks character, it enjoys the advantage of being clearly reproducable.

.

Union Street street sign, Michael J. Maddigan, photographer, June 8, 2009.

Street signs in the downtown district, already unique for their red coloring, exhibit the French blue-colored Town Seal on their left hand side.