Today due to time constraints we will have a Monday without a mystery! Instead here is a view of City Hall back when the Bergh statue stood in front. Enjoy!
Probably nothing new here to some, but when I came across this looking for something else (isn’t that how a good amount of old information is found?) I could not pass it up without sharing.
Milwaukee Sentinel August 6, 1870
The first tavern kept in Milwaukee was opened in 1835 by Mr. Jacques Vieau, father-in-law of Solomon Juneau, in a small building on East Water street, about opposite the present location of Lansing Bunnells’ establishment. The building was afterwards known as the Cottage Inn, and formed a portion of the new tavern which was erected in 1843 and burned down in the conflagration of 1845.
The first public house of importance built in this city was the Milwaukee House, which was commenced in 1835 and finished in 1837. It was erected by Messrs. Juneau and Martin, and occupied the present site of the Young Men’s Association building. The main building was subsequently removed to the northeast corner of Huron and Broadway, where it was destroyed by fire. A wing of the original building is yet in existence, serving as a carriage works for Meincke, corner of Main and Detroit. It was for a long time known as the Keystone State Hotel, and was quite popular under the landlordship of the late Andrew J. McCormick.
Dennis Pajot
Milwaukee
Start your week off right by trying to guess which building the gargoyle sits atop. The clues for this little guy is a church right on the edge of downtown. Other clues can be found in the picture if you are a good detective!
Last year I was browsing the Library of Congress website doing research on some of their photographic collections of Milwaukee material. I was already familiar with the work of John Vachon, a Farm Security Administration (FSA) photographer who had spent some time in Milwaukee in September 1939 and was browsing his work. Some of the catalogued pictures had no descriptions but obviously were from the same date as other pictures from Milwaukee. This one in particular intrigued me because it was a Milwaukee-style building but I did not recognize it at all.
It stayed in the back of mind for months but it was a building that was long lost or from somewhere else. Today while looking through some images I have scanned from other sources I came across this picture and recognized it almost immediately. It was the mystery building right in the heart of downtown! I still have yet to piece together the history of the lost building but now I have an address which is a start.
Sometime in the 1960s it was torn down to make way for this nondescript parking structure.
Progress…
Interesting thoughts on pay for aldermen, from the Daily Republican-Sentinel of December 19, 1882. I wonder how this discussion would go today.
Dennis Pajot
Milwaukee
The Council went into committee of the whole, with Ald. Dixon in the chair, to consider the question of salaries for aldermen, to take effect January 1.
Ald. Dodge moved to refer the whole matter to a special committee of five, who would present it to the Legislature to have the compensation fixed as thought best, not to exceed $500. Ald. Barth moved to make the remuneration $1000 per annum, $500 not being enough for good men. Ald. Stemper said he drew up the bill to secure salaries with the best intentions in the world. The members of the Council get no thanks for anything, but were always ridiculed and blamed. Ald. Stirn favored the passage of the bill to take effect in the year 2000. Ald. Hinsey said the offices were accepted with the knowledge that there was no recompense, and it was belittling the position to go to voting salaries. It did not agree with the aid to reduce taxes. Ald. Wood thought the aldermen were abused for everything, and should be paid, yet he could hardly vote for it. Ald. Barth referred to the modesty of the Council in not wishing to vote themselves pay, and moved no present member receive emolument, but in future $1,000 per annum be paid. Ald. Chase said to take such a step would lower the standing of the Council, as it would be filled, if there was a salary attached, by men with no other wish than to get the money. Ald. Stemper said he did not know when he was elected how much work there was attached, or he would not have accepted. The gentleman spoke at some length very warmly in support of his bill, jingling the change in his pockets meanwhile, as though it was the fat “roll” of a year’s wages at his figure. Ald. Stirn said if the aldermen were paid, the school commissioners should be, and wanted to know if that was done, where for God’s sake would the city go to? Ald Swan said Ald. Chase had hit the nail on the head. If aldermen became salaried officers caucuses would be packed, and elections would be made to carry out schemes. Ald. Fritz put it that his time was worth money, and he wanted pay for his services. Ald. Knoernschild said he had worked all he cared to for glory, and he wanted money. He would recommend, however, that the first year of service there be no compensation, but for the next two of the term of office there be paid $1000. The committee adjourned to report progress.
Ald. Dodge
Today’s mystery takes us back downtown to a well known landmark building. “Historic”, you might say. The small cherub is a common theme in the Monday Mystery series and on Milwaukee buildings but this one is a little different than most we have had in the past. Who can be the first to guess where this guy is?
I am almost at that point where I have exhausted the interesting faces on downtown buildings so it is time to start moving to other areas of the city. Hopefully some of you may be able to more easily identify these buildings!
This near south-side building in the Fifth ward was built in 1899 as the picture shows with this fancy stone scrollwork above the entrance. This design does not have a face but it is distinctive enough that some of you may have noticed it. This is on a major thoroughfare and an extra clue will be the last few symbols in this paragraph. Where is this building located ??????
Today’s mystery figure/face is on a well known east side building (not east side of downtown). This picture depicts a coal miner which had significance for the original owner of the building. Who can be the first to guess the building and where it is located??
The stag head shown below sits above the entrance to a popular East Town restaurant. Who will be the first to guess where this mystery face is located?
Next time you travel over the Hoan Bridge, look around and imagine what might have been if some ideas had been carried through about 80 years ago. This editorial is from the Milwaukee Journal of August 27, 1930. Remember, Maitland field was about where the summerfest grounds are now, and of course, the Illinois Steel Co. site was south of this.
“A.R. Taliaferro, chief of the airport division of the United States department of commerce, tells Milwaukeeans something about Maitland field. It is too small, he says, for general airport use; it probably is not the proper field ultimately to be a main airport and certainly not the proper field to be a joint water-rail-air terminal. Mr. Taliaferro makes no final declaration. His considered opinion will be submitted later. But these seem to be his impressions.
They are in line with what some others have said, with what many Milwaukeeans have thought. Probably the right place for a lake front airport is on the Illinois Street Co. site and on new land that can be made there.
This site also is wanted by the harbor commission. That commission cannot show immediate need for the big tract of land. In fact, it is doubtful whether the purchase of the area would be justified merely for harbor purposes. What the harbor will become—how much shipping will make use of it—remains to be seen.
However, if both ships and airplanes can use this site, and if rail terminals upon it also can be arranged, then the purchase decidedly is worth considering.
Milwaukee should have a lake front terminal airport. It should use Maitland field temporarily; perhaps it will always be of use as a lakefront landing place. But we should not allow any group of enthusiasts to induce the expenditure of much money on that field or gradually to edge in permanent improvements that never will be adequate for real terminal purposes in any event.
Maitland field presents more than the problem of size. The question is whether Milwaukee wants to develop another transportation terminal dangerously near that part of its lake short already dedicated to recreational use, especially by those who cannot afford cottages on inland lakes; or whether the water-rail-air terminal should be developed on another part of the shore, better formed, or larger landing area, more suitable and nearly as convenient to the downtown district.
Maitland field should be used in the meantime, of course; but it should not be developed on any large scale when something better is in prospect—at least not unless the purchase of the Illinois Steel Co. site is found to be impracticable”.
Dennis Pajot
Milwaukee