1893: the destruction of the World's Columbian Exposition in Chicago

anotherlayer

Well-known member
Messages
635
Reactions
2,125
Are these supposed to be construction, or dismantling photographs?
Both, most likely. When they demolished these buildings, they took care of the wood and the reusable bits and sold them off (to help recoup the massive money loss). If they were just demolishing just to get rid of them, I highly doubt they would take such care and concern.
 

Timeshifter

Well-known member
Messages
277
Reactions
850
I won't be the 1st to say/ think this, but these photos in the thread could be from any time period.

You can write 1893 or whatever on any photograph... they could be from a 1000 years ago for all we know.

They could be showing the actual construction, but the time frame could be anything...

:cautious:
 

anotherlayer

Well-known member
Messages
635
Reactions
2,125
I won't be the 1st to say/ think this, but these photos in the thread could be from any time period.

You can write 1893 or whatever on any photograph... they could be from a 1000 years ago for all we know.

They could be showing the actual construction, but the time frame could be anything...

:cautious:
So, I still don't understand what we are trying to figure out. Whether modern day humans (our ancestors from 100 years ago) built these things or whether our ancestors actually lived 300 years ago?

I do understand this idea that photographs can be given any date and no one ever argues otherwise, but I have direct relations to people who lived through these Expositions. We have photographs and newspaper articles and personal stories and houses where you can pinpoint the day the occupant went and visited these Expos. Are we saying that all of this has been doctored to make it look like these Expos were only 100 years ago when they were potentially hundreds of years ago?

I love conspiracies, but this whole idea that (for example) the Pan-Am Expo of 1901 was actually from the 1700s or 1800s and that we had cameras and the Tartars built these complexes is just a huge stretch with absolutely zero proof. All we keep saying is "maybe it's not 1901". Where is any evidence of this? Is it just pure doubt?
 

Timeshifter

Well-known member
Messages
277
Reactions
850
So, I still don't understand what we are trying to figure out. Whether modern day humans (our ancestors from 100 years ago) built these things or whether our ancestors actually lived 300 years ago?

I do understand this idea that photographs can be given any date and no one ever argues otherwise, but I have direct relations to people who lived through these Expositions. We have photographs and newspaper articles and personal stories and houses where you can pinpoint the day the occupant went and visited these Expos. Are we saying that all of this has been doctored to make it look like these Expos were only 100 years ago when they were potentially hundreds of years ago?

I love conspiracies, but this whole idea that (for example) the Pan-Am Expo of 1901 was actually from the 1700s or 1800s and that we had cameras and the Tartars built these complexes is just a huge stretch with absolutely zero proof. All we keep saying is "maybe it's not 1901". Where is any evidence of this? Is it just pure doubt?
These are the things for us to work out I guess. However exhausting it becomes.

Its entirely possible people beleive they built and or visited these things 100 years ago, but memory is a very twisted and easily manipulated and altered thing. Can you trust peoples memories? I wouldn't trust mine past 20 years. Hell, what happened to me today is already being dressed up and replayed as something else in my mind, its human nature. When you inject all the other intervenes which alter memories over the years they quickly become more like fairy tales. People don't lie, becuse they genuinely beleive their memories.

Its possible these things are 1000s of years old, and our not long dead relaties passed stories of building (in reality re building) them, visiting them etc on, but the memories and stories were skewed.

All I do know is we can take nothing at face value 👍
 
Last edited:

jd755

Well-known member
Messages
740
Reactions
1,923
There is no demolishing which has to come before dismantling and it creates a lot of mess which is simply missing from these pictures. These structures and crucially their terracotta and plaster decorations are going up.
Been through the lot at thumbnail size now and here's the pick from my angle.
The amount of trees chopped down to feed this monster is unfathomable.

EDIT Apologies for the 'chopped off' pictures below I didn't figure out until this morning that the way to get the whole picture is to click the "view all and print button" So here's one of the foundations that are large diameter tree trunks knocked by the steam pile driver pictured down the page. i have applied a one level unsharp mask filter in gimp purely for clarity and cropped the greyscale marker out, the blocky thing you will see in some pictures below.
foundation.jpeg



First the electricity subway before and after.
leccy.jpeg

wiresnbeams.jpeg


Next up the garbage incinerator
garbageincinerator.jpeg


How to fake a battleship 1890's style.
ship.jpeg

ship3.jpeg


Terracotta sculpting
terracotta2.jpeg



Machinery inc manpower and boarding houses
steam roller2.jpeg

steamdredger2.jpg

winding gear.jpg

boardinghouse.jpeg

manpower.jpeg


Faking it with plaster and terracotta.
head.jpg

amature.jpeg

horse.jpeg

plas1.jpeg


You will never trust 'ruins' again
yuctan.jpg


These ones I feel are permanent, at least were meant to be.
perm3.jpg

perm1.jpeg


statue.jpg


kd_separator.jpg

So taking the lead from vonkitty I began digging into the funders of the Chicago Exposition, the names if you will and also who gained using my friends duckduckgo and giberu, no wakiwikigoogle here!

Straight into this site World's Columbian Exposition
which gives reasons and names, well some names.

When the World's Columbian Exposition opened, only 22 years had passed since the Chicago Fire of 1871; only 28 years had passed since the end of the American Civil War. In the interval, the era of Reconstruction had given way to a Gilded Age characterized by frenetic industrial growth, mass immigration, and class violence as evidenced by Chicago's 1886 Haymarket Square bombing.
With many Americans wondering if sectional conflict had given way to class conflict, American political and economic leaders followed the example of their peers in Europe and turned increasingly to the medium of the world's fair to provide the cultural cement for their badly fragmented societies.

Momentum to celebrate the Columbian quadricentennial began building in the early 1880s. By the close of the decade, civic leaders in St. Louis, New York City, and Washington DC joined their counterparts in Chicago and announced that they were interested in hosting a fair that, in a time of great economic uncertainty, held the promise of generating commercial profits as well as increasing real-estate values. Exposition backers also were also motivated by the prospect of securing greater prestige for themselves and for their cities. By 1890, it was clear that the U.S. Congress would have to decide where the fair would be held and that the principal contenders, by virtue of their superior financial resources, would be Chicago and New York.


So seemingly all about solving political problems, social problems, giving the linings of the pockets of the wealthy another layer, selling shit, where have we seen that before! and making themselves and 'their cities' more presigious. What we over here would call a dick waving contest.

New York's financial titans, including J. P. Morgan, Cornelius Vanderbilt, and William Waldorf Astor, pledged $15 million to underwrite the fair if Congress awarded it to New York City. Not to be outdone, Chicago's leading capitalists and exposition sponsors, including Charles T. Yerkes, Marshall Field, Philip Armour, Gustavus Swift, and Cyrus McCormick, responded in kind. Furthermore, Chicago's promoters presented evidence of significant financial support from the city and state as well as over $5 million in stock subscriptions from people from every walk of life. What finally led Congress to vote in Chicago's favor was banker Lyman Gage's ability to raise several million additional dollars in a 24-hour period to best New York's final offer.

So bribery and corruption from the get go impressing Congress to swing it. so much for philanthropy. Bankers impressing politicians with chicnery, has anything really changed since then?

Permitting myself a wander into the real estate aspect as it has a link in the tet above Real Estate

I find some fantastic statistics about the city and its environs.

Chicago's real-estate activities divide into several branches, each with its trade, industry, or professional association. These include land assembly and subdivision platting, building, brokerage, property management, mortgage lending, land title insurance, and appraisal and land value monitoring and research.

Nineteenth-Century Subdivision and Development

Chicago's early real-estate enterprise was marked by large-scale development and land speculation attending one of the world's fastest-growing cities. In less than the lifespan of one of Chicago's earliest residents, Emily Beaubien Le Beau (1825–1919), Chicago grew from fewer than 100 people into being the fourth-largest city in the world.

Most of Chicago's early builders and investors were attracted by the possibilities offered by canal building, the city's rapid growth after the Civil War, or its resurgence after the fire of 1871. No other large city experienced such extensive and excessive subdivision platting and such volatile boom-and-bust cycles in land values. Fortunes were made and lost with each new cycle.


The Wild north not the Wild West?

Potter Palmer bought three-quarters of a mile of State Street in 1867, built a score of buildings there, and bought land on the near north lakefront in 1882 for his mansion.

The firm of S. E. Gross targeted German buyers in bilingual ads for lots near horsecar and rail lines in the 1880s and near elevated lines in the 1890s, selling up to 500 lots a week in the land boom in the early years of that decade.


Here we find the main four players in the build process.

Many downtown commercial interests favored a central location, but struggles over property rights and traffic congestion forced the exposition corporation, headed by Harlow N. Higinbotham, and the national exposition commission, headed by Thomas W. Palmer, to settle for Jackson Park, a marshy bog seven miles south of the Loop.

To hasten the process of construction and exhibit selection, exposition authorities vested responsibility in Daniel H. Burnham, the exposition's director of works, and George R. Davis, director-general. Both drew inspiration from earlier fairs, especially the 1889 Paris Universal Exposition with its famed Eiffel Tower. And both sought ways to make the Chicago fair distinctive.


So off to another site to find out if the four are indeed tasked the way mentioned above. From here; 1893: Chicago and the World's Columbian Exposition: Digital Collections for the Classroom

Daniel Burnham served as the fair’s lead architect and oversaw the design and planning of the fair’s main buildings.

So Dan was Director of Works and Lead Architect.

Sticking with him to find out what he had done previously to warrant his appointment I got to here; How Daniel Burnham and the 1893 Columbian Exposition Influence Innovation at Burnham Nationwide

Where his full name of Daniel Hudson Burnham is revealed.

Daniel Burnham was the Director of Works for the World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago and also took a leading role in the creation of master plans for the development of the City of Chicago. His influence stretches beyond the many notable skyscrapers he designed, like the Rookery Building, the Marshall Field and Company Building, and Union Station, and is continued to be felt across the city today.

So nothing prior mentioned but lots after. There's one man who seems to have gained from the Exposition, financially and reputationally.

The original Palace of Fine Arts Building was designed by Charles B. Atwood for D.H. Burnham & Co. The building was constructed with a brick substructure under a plaster facade.

His company was D.H Burnham & Co and employed designers and or architects.
A very slight aside.
In 1933, the building was converted to the Museum of Science and Industry and was re-cast in limestone to preserve the Beaux Arts facade. re-cast!!!

From here; Daniel Burnham

I'd lay odds he was a Freemason.

Built in 1892 by Daniel Burnham and John Root, the Masonic Temple Building was tallest skyscraper in Chicago at the time.

Burnham and Root were being called upon to build what amounted to an entire city in about three years-not just any city, but one that would surpass the brilliance of the Paris exposition. The fair also would have to make a profit. Among Chicago's leading men, profitability was a matter of personal and civic honor.


I'd lay odds they were all Freemasons.

Still no mention of what he had done prior so back to the search.
From here; Daniel Burnham
One of the most significant figures in Chicago’s history, Daniel H. Burnham was an architect, an urban planner, and, most of all, a businessman who knew how to make things happen. At the turn of the 20th century, he was arguably the most influential architect in America, albeit one who had not attended architecture school.

Bet you didn't see that bolded bit coming!

Burnham was criticized, especially by Louis Sullivan, for designing buildings that looked like Roman and Greek temples.

No shit! So there must be something prior he designed unless he was looking at old engravings/paintings in books or had travelled to see the extant ruins of the 'Greeks and Romans'.

As Burnham saw it, “Beauty has always paid better than any other commodity, and always will.”

Don't know about you but I find that short statement quite chilling.

Jumping over to the page about his business partner to see if that would throw any light on previous endeavours John Wellborn Root

Burnham and Root met when they worked in the Chicago offices of Carter, Drake, and Wright. They joined forces in 1873, combining Root’s artistry and Burnham’s business aptitude.

Hmm business aptitude not design skill.

So off searching for Carter, Drake, and Wright to see if any light could be shed on this increasingly mysterious characters design abilities.

From here; Burnham and Root - Great Buildings Online

Daniel Burnham was born in Henderson, New York in 1846. He studied at the New Church School in Waltham, Massachusetts and received private tutoring. He worked for William Le Baron Jenney in his Chicago office for a short time. After several failed attempts in other businesses, he eventually joined the firm of Carter, Drake and Wright.

Burnham and Root first met in 1872 in the Chicago offices of Carter, Drake, and Wright where both worked as draftsmen. In 1873 the two established a partnership that successfully utilized the idealism of Root and the pragmatism of Burnham.

During their eighteen years together, Burnham and Root designed and built private houses, office buildings, apartment buildings, railroad stations, warehouses, schools, hospitals, and churches. Burnham developed and managed the office organization while Root headed the design department.

Although the firm had a steady supply of residential commissions, their most memorable works are a series of 'big buildings for big business'. Their best known buildings have been celebrated for the inclusion of pioneering structural components, the detailed treatment of surface, and the handling of interior and exterior volumes.


This chap William Le Baron Jenney seems interesting and indeed he is.
From here; William Le Baron Jenney: Biography of Skyscraper Architect

he received a practical education at Phillips Academy, Andover, and other New England schools. After a voyage to the South Pacific he entered the Lawrence Scientific School of Harvard University to study civil engineering, but finding the instruction inadequate he transferred to the Ecole Centrale des Arts et Manufactures, Paris, a sister institution to the Ecole des Beaux-Arts, where he studied engineering and architecture from 1853 to 1856. There he learned the latest iron construction techniques as well as the classical functionalist doctrine of Jean-Nicolas-Louis Durand (1760-1834) - Professor of Architecture at the Ecole Polytechnique - which was the standard architectural curriculum of French engineering schools. One of Jenney's classmates was Gustave Eiffel (1832-1923), who went on to design the Eiffel Tower (1887-89),

Purely from that resume he is far better suited, in my book, to head up the building of the Expositon, but wait there's more.

In 1861, after working in Mexico, Jenney returned to the US and joined the Union Army, designing fortifications and other military installations. After the war, he moved to Chicago, where he opened his own design office, specializing in commercial buildings and urban planning. One of his first architectural commissions was for the West Parks, inspired by Baron Haussmann's plan for the renewal of Paris. This involved the creation of a system of major parks - Humboldt, Garfield and Douglas - and minor parks connected by grand, tree-lined boulevards. At the same time he collaborated with landscape architects Frederick Olmsted (1822-1903) and Calvert Vaux (1824-95) in the planning of Riverside, Illinois,

See what I mean. Compare that to Burnhams resume and which one would you give the job to?
But wait there's more.

His domestic work was characterized by houses possessing free and open ground plans and equipped with the latest in technical conveniences, as exemplified by the Colonel James H. Bowen House (1868), Hyde Park, Illinois, a Swiss chalet with open circulation that predates the Prairie School style of Frank Lloyd Wright (1867-1959) by more than 30 years.

In 1893 he helped to promote the World's Columbian Exposition held in Chicago, and designed its Horticultural Building. Considered one of the fair's finest structures, its area of five and one-quarter acres made it the largest ever botanical conservatory.


Doesn't feel right somehow. Perhaps he wasn't a Freemason.
However this bit on that page makes no sense.

Since the latter included some of the most eminent architects of the 19th century, such as Daniel Burnham (1846-1912), Louis Sullivan (1856-1924), William Holabird, and Martin Roche, it can be said that he was the founder of the Chicago School of architecture.

When the bottom of the page has this list where our Daniel doesn't feature!

Other Famous American Architects

Greek Revival
Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)
Benjamin Latrobe (1764-1820)

Neoclassical
William Thornton (1759-1828)
Charles Bulfinch (1763-1844)

Gothic Revival
Richard Upjohn (1802-78)
James Renwick (1818-95)

Romanesque
Henry Hobson Richardson (1838-86)

Beaux-Arts
Richard Morris Hunt (1827-95)
Cass Gilbert (1859-1934)


Have to leave it there for now.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

trismegistus

Well-known member
Messages
227
Reactions
1,194
Great finds, @jd755! Like I said in the Battlefield thread, once you start pulling apart these architects is when you see that the shit really starts stinking!

he received a practical education at Phillips Academy, Andover, and other New England schools. After a voyage to the South Pacific he entered the Lawrence Scientific School of Harvard University to study civil engineering, but finding the instruction inadequate he transferred to the Ecole Centrale des Arts et Manufactures, Paris, a sister institution to the Ecole des Beaux-Arts, where he studied engineering and architecture from 1853 to 1856.
Admittedly, I was making an internal bet with myself to see how long it would take someone else to come across yet another "student" of L'ecole des Beaux Arts!

Ecole Centrale des Arts et Manufactures


Founded in 1829, it was among the most prestigious and selective grandes écoles
Rooted in rich entrepreneurial tradition since the industrial revolution era, it served as the cradle for top-level engineers and executives who continue to constitute a major part of the industry leadership in France. Since the 19th century, its model of education for training generalist engineers inspired the establishment of several engineering institutes around the world, such as the École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne in Switzerland, Faculté polytechnique de Mons in Belgium, as well as other member schools of the Ecole Centrales Group alliance in France, Morocco, China, and India.
École Centrale des Arts et Manufactures was founded in 1829 as a private institute by Alphonse Lavallée, a lawyer and a prominent businessman from Nantes, who put forward most of his personal capital into founding the school, together with three top scientists who became its founding associates: Eugène Peclet, Jean-Baptiste Dumas, and Théodore Olivier. Notably, Lavallée was a shareholder of Le Globe, which became in 1831 the official organ of the Saint-Simonian movement.
Alphonse Lavallee

Alphonse_Lavallée_(1791–1873).gif
Buste_alphonse_lavallée.jpg

What's he doing with his hand there? :sneaky:

Stolen History needs its own version of Godwin's law - - that the longer an investigation goes the higher likelihood Freemasonry comes up.

Alphonse Lavallée (1791–1873) is the founder of the École Centrale Paris, a French Grande École.
He was born in Savigné-l'Évêque (Sarthe region, France). After studying law in Paris, Lavallée became the director of various companies such as the Compagnie du chemin de fer de Paris à Orléans. He also became a businessman in the region of Nantes, working for ten years with his brother-in-law who was a shipowner of the merchant vessel Bourgault Ducoudray. After moving to Paris in 1827 where he moved with his wife and his one-year-old daughter, Amazilli, Lavallée became a shareholder of the Le Globe, a liberal opposition newspaper with Saint-Simonian roots.
This guy is a complete spook. The two photos I found of him were at some point attached to his wiki profile but are missing from the current wiki page as it stands. The "source" for proving this man existed mentions Alphonse offhandedly. You'd think there would be quite a bit more information available on one of the men who started this prestigious school. The only primary source I can find attributed to this man is this book but admittedly my French isn't good enough to find anything tantalizing if there is anything to be found there.

In 1933, the building was converted to the Museum of Science and Industry and was re-cast in limestone to preserve the Beaux Arts facade. re-cast!!!
I'd love to see photos of this process. Clearly some must exist, we have photos of the original "construction" and of photos of it in the ensuing decades after the expo. That said, my money might be on those photos being the original state of the building before it was renovated for the fair. So far I haven't found any real proof that this building was "recast in limestone"
 

jd755

Well-known member
Messages
740
Reactions
1,923
Well your lead again so I've started digging into the 'french connection' so when there's a natural break in the searching I'll post a new thread. To keep this one ticking over here's some more photo's and a bit of text that suggest to me always to me the palace of fine arts (shares the same name with a san francisco expo building which confuses the hell out of image search) was never built to last.

Palace of fine arts.jpg
cgp_spe_p00001_046_029_002.jpg


From here Remnants of the White City
After the World's Fair, the building became the Field Museum, until 1921 when the Field moved to its current location. The Palace of Fine Arts building was vacant and started to deteriorate until the restoration in 1926. By 1933 they'd replicated the original exterior plaster with Indiana limestone in an incredibly faithful reproduction of the Palace of Fine Arts."

Thus removing the fakery from the Exposition and replacing it with actual limestone, so next thing is to track down the source of the limestone or the company who did the renovation or carving/casting.
 

trismegistus

Well-known member
Messages
227
Reactions
1,194

According to this, those responsible are:

Julius Rosenwald

The Commercial Club of Chicago (still exists today in some capacity)

There were definitely some serious movers and shakers in that club, see their historical entry for 1913:

Member John V. Farwell, Jr. championed a campaign to reform the Federal Reserve and helped draft the Federal Reserve Banking Act of 1913.

____________________________________________________________________

Edit:

Found a very tantalizing source regarding what took down most of these buildings, apparently.

The book is called The Vanishing Fair, and seems to be dated from 1894.

00014004.jpg


00014005.jpg00014007.jpg00014009.jpg00014011.jpg00014001.jpg


How did the Palace of Fine Arts survive this? According to this book, this fire was brought upon by striking railroad workers (Pullman Strike). Surely they didn't have the foresight to leave one building for renovation.

As far as I can see, this is the only source that claims strikers were the cause of this fire. Mainstream sources don't mention this in regards to either the Pullman Strike or the World's Fair, other than strikers set fire to "some buildings." I'd think setting fire to these cultural icons would have at least made the history books. It'd be like if a group of protesters burned down Disneyworld, 100 years later they wouldn't just say "protesters burned down some buildings"
 
Last edited:

VonKitty

Active member
Messages
44
Reactions
157
Admittedly, I was making an internal bet with myself to see how long it would take someone else to come across yet another "student" of L'ecole des Beaux Arts!

Ecole Centrale des Arts et Manufactures
Alphonse Lavallee​

What's he doing with his hand there? :sneaky:

Stolen History needs its own version of Godwin's law - - that the longer an investigation goes the higher likelihood Freemasonry comes up.

This guy is a complete spook. The two photos I found of him were at some point attached to his wiki profile but are missing from the current wiki page as it stands. The "source" for proving this man existed mentions Alphonse offhandedly. You'd think there would be quite a bit more information available on one of the men who started this prestigious school. The only primary source I can find attributed to this man is this book but admittedly my French isn't good enough to find anything tantalizing if there is anything to be found there.
He certainly is a mystery. I can only find the same exact story, word for word, on every site. Of course French sites turn up, but unfortunately I do not speak French. Curious if any French members could tell us more about him?
And as for photos, you can forget it. Alphonse Lavallee is also a type of grape, and so I found lots of this lol
: 7166BD98-B358-4254-9DC4-B92C81387705.jpeg

I was thinking there could be more to his shares in Le Globe and the Saint-Simonian movement, but again found nothing.
 

studytruth

Active member
Messages
37
Reactions
131
Great book trism. Never gone through that one yet.
My research indicates 3 fires in 1894. One in January that took down court of honor. One in June that took down a lot more, esp the big buildings. Most historical sources mix the two into 1 but they were 2 separate fires, neither is claimed on the railway strike, which was like 1892, so I think that is just an historical reference. The fires are claimed on tramps, slash poor people. That is all part of the narrative.
Another fire happened in 1896 that burned the statue of the republic, but I think it survived and is in some rich basement. I found some weird things of other fairs that survived that were not supposed to.
 

jd755

Well-known member
Messages
740
Reactions
1,923
As there are two three mentions of the Palace of Fine Arts being built of rendered brick now I went back to those 720 images on here and found one showing the brick walls and the thin metal (iron or steel) glass roof supports. Interestingly there is also what looks to me to be a cement or lime kiln in the shot.
From here; World's Columbian Exposition, Palace of Fine Arts :: Archival Image & Media Collection

bricks.png

Also here's another shot said by the description to be after the Field Museum moved but before the renovations in the late twenties. The same roof supports are seen in the background.
From here Chicagoland’s Million Vacant Lots, and Other Recent Research Finds | Forgotten Chicago | History, Architecture, and Infrastructure

MSI-Interior.jpg

The reason why this one was built in brick is said to be the fact the lenders of the artworks didn't want to lend unless it was going into a more secure brick or stone building, of course no way to check the veracity of this.

From here; https://sah-archipedia.org/buildings/IL-01-031-0061
Although the other fair buildings were temporary structures built of steel and lumber and finished with staff (a stucco-like mixture of cement, plaster, and jute fibers), the Palace of Fine Arts was constructed of masonry, as museums would not loan artworks unless they were displayed in a more durable, waterproof and fireproof building.
 

whitewave

Well-known member
Messages
1,471
Reactions
4,616
Came accross some spectacular photos of the expo in an old picture book. High quality, very zoomable.
photos of expo start plate 51
[Album de photographies du Canada et des États-Unis] / [divers photographes] | Gallica

Also later has great period photos of boston, ny, and odd early photo of statue of liberty, and a label p 140 called Egyptian Temple Mammoth Cave. Lots of other oddities in this book
Is that the right link? There were only 2 photos available. One was of a bay labeled "Quebec" (no date) and the other was of some people boating in a cave or tunnel. Also no date. Maybe your computer likes you better than mine likes me. Could you post some photos of what you're seeing on that link? TIA.
 

studytruth

Active member
Messages
37
Reactions
131
Is that the right link? There were only 2 photos available. One was of a bay labeled "Quebec" (no date) and the other was of some people boating in a cave or tunnel. Also no date. Maybe your computer likes you better than mine likes me. Could you post some photos of what you're seeing on that link? TIA.
Here are two, I had to just do snips as I can not seem to download anything directly from the book, the quality on screen is much better but it is to show you a few
chi1.JPG
chi2.JPG
 

whitewave

Well-known member
Messages
1,471
Reactions
4,616
A whole site of pictures like those would be great to peruse but, for some reason, I just can't access them via that link. Is anyone else having trouble seeing the pics? Being computer illiterate, I figure it's just me but maybe not and there's some simple trick to allow me access to the pics. Thanks for sharing the above.
 

jd755

Well-known member
Messages
740
Reactions
1,923
A whole site of pictures like those would be great to peruse but, for some reason, I just can't access them via that link. Is anyone else having trouble seeing the pics? Being computer illiterate, I figure it's just me but maybe not and there's some simple trick to allow me access to the pics. Thanks for sharing the above.
No gallica is appalling here as well. Unusable for me and deathly slow.
 

Mabzynn

Well-known member
Messages
113
Reactions
399
Both, most likely. When they demolished these buildings, they took care of the wood and the reusable bits and sold them off (to help recoup the massive money loss). If they were just demolishing just to get rid of them, I highly doubt they would take such care and concern.
Plus, some of the major players behind Sears like Julius Rosenwald were involved in certain expos.. They sold those house kits for years, and I'd guess a lot of it was recycled expo material.
 

Maxine

Active member
Messages
118
Reactions
244
I wonder what is this? Found it on google but looks interesting. This looks like it's from the time when this was still a city before the civilization who occupied it destruction, with functioning steampunk robots and e.t.c.
!!!1893 expo ROBOT.jpg
 

Top