1883 - April 1

On the second of April, 1883, an article appeared in the Spectator in support of a “free library” for the citizens of Hamilton :

“There are in this city hundreds of intelligent workingmen who would be glad of a library, which was a library in fact as well as in name, and from which they could procure books on technical, mechanical and political subjects, the study of which would help them to become more skilled as workmen, and better citizens generally. The workingmen do want a library, and are willing to help support one. So do the wealthier classes. The merchant wants a reading room where he can find the latest editions of all the best commercial and general newspapers and periodicals, and both the merchants and the workingmen want a place where they can step off the street and have a business or social chat with a friend without having to go to a hotel.” ¹

¹ “A Free Library : the Workingman in Favor of a Scheme” Hamilton Spectator. April 2, 1883.

On April 3, 1883, the Victoria Rifle club celebrated its twentieth anniversary with a dinner at the St. Nicholas hotel. Lieut.-Col. Gibson, president of the club, was the chairman of the occasion. During the evening, the chairman paid a tribute to Mr. Kilvert, local member of parliament:

“ (Gibson thanked Kilvert) for the efforts made as representative of the city in furthering the interests of the club by helping to secure from the government a proper range for shooting. Gibson also remarked that in the interest of riflemen and the volunteer force, the securing of a lease, or the purchase of the ranges at Ainslie wood, should be pressed upon the Dominion government.”²

² “The Gallant Riflemen : Celebrate Their Anniversary in Fitting Style” Hamilton Spectator. April 4, 1883.

On April 5, 1883, an Spectator article turned light of the issue of some farm women, who, on market days, sold butter from the back steps of the city hall. It was claimed that in eleven cases out of twelve, the women were there to evade the payment of a market fee, and that the women were a nuisance to regular market stall holders :

“If a suitable butter market was provided, it would not have the effect of mitigating the nuisance to any alarming extent. But a few years ago, the city fitted up a butter market place in the room now occupied by the health officers in the city hall, but this was occupied so seldom by the farmers that the city turned it to its present use.”³

³ “The Butter Market” Hamilton Spectator April 5, 1883.

On April 6, 1883, the Spectator carried an article which examined the difficulty many Hamiltonians faced in procuring dependable domestic help :

“Good servant girls are very hard to get. Whether it is that the majority of the giddy creatures are so taken up with thinking of frills and ribbons, of handsome young men with heaps of money, who will come some day and carry them off to eternal happiness; or whether laziness, pure and simple, is at the bottom of it, it is pretty hard to say.”⁴

⁴ “ The Kitchen Belles : Some Remarks Concerning the All-Important Servant Girl Question” Hamilton Spectator. April 6, 1883.

Investigating the matter, the Spectator reporter visited a servant girl’s registry office where the keeper said :

“There are plenty of girls, but not good ones. The girls are lazy; many of them drink and are of general bad character. It isn’t very often that a bad girl gets a place through me, but, of course, I am liable to make mistakes as well as other people, and sometimes a veritable she-devil is introduced into a quiet household. It is only a little while ago that a girl came to me for a place. She was a pretty little thing. Her hair was like spun gold, her eyes as blue as the sky overhead and her skin as soft as soft and creamy could be. Her lips looked like a rosebud bursting into bloom. Well, I got her a place and for a week or two everything ran smoothly. One day the lady of the house went down to Toronto intending to stay for a couple of days; but she returned unexpectedly in the evening and found her husband in the servants’ room with little beauty. Of course, there was a fuss about it, but the matter was all hushed up. The girl came to me to get her another place but I had one experience with her and that was enough, so I told her to go. It is a shame that girls don’t try and do better. I have applications everyday for servants that are impossible to fill. Cooks in private households get from $8 to $12 a month and board, and general servants from $6 to $10”⁴

“Bad Young Men  - Last night, three or four dudes made a descent upon Wesley Church, and seating themselves in the rear pews, kept that part of the church in confusion throughout the service by giggling, throwing marbles and peas and little stones around, and attempting to flirt with some young girls who sat in front of them. They are known, and probably wouldn’t care very much to see their names in print, but they will have that pleasure if they keep up their antics.”   Hamilton Spectator   April 9, 1883.

On Friday, April 13, 1883, the fifty-five Hamilton members of the Cigarmakers’ Union went on strike against the eight cigar manufacturing firms in the city. The issue which provoked the strike action concerned the implementation of a sliding scale of apprentices allowed in each shop. The employers did not want any limits put on the number of apprentices they wished to have in their premises.

The workers, fearing that the increased use of apprentice labor would lower their wages were determined not to give in on the issue:

“ ‘You know,’ a cigarmaker said, ‘Hamilton is the stronghold of the union in Ontario and we mean to maintain our rights.’ ”⁵

⁵ “On Strike : the Cigarmakers Determined to Stay Out” Hamilton Spectator. April 14, 1883.

The journeymen on strike were asked by a Spectator reporter if there was any thought given to the formation of a co-operative cigar manufacturing company:

“That is the very thing we are considering now : we can get any amount of stock by selling shares of $5, and allowing no one to hold more than four or five shares. All the unions in the city will help us and subscribe to the stock. We will then establish a factory with about 40 or 50 hands, and procure a good store or two for the sale of our own goods. We can get up a label for our cigars and have it copyrighted. If the manufacturers do not come to time in about a week, we will come out with our own goods, and manage our own offices.”⁵

“A Spectator reporter stood in the east end steps of the court house yesterday morning and gazed anxiously up and down John street to see if anything worthy of notice was going on, for news was scarce and the head of the poor scribe was heavy as lead as he thought of the small quantity of copy he would be able to furnish. Way off to his right hand stretched the mountain, kissed along the top with the dim blue atmosphere that the sun had not been strong enough to dispel. Looking across the road, he espied in the window of a hotel that fronts on John street, an evidently newly-married couple. He sat on a chair by the window sill and she occupied a graceful position upon his knees, with one white arm thrown caressingly around his neck. Suddenly she bent her lovely head and printed an eager kiss upon his lips.

“ ‘They bin doin’ that for the last three days,’ said the court house janitor, who stood by the reporter’s elbow, ‘ain’t it nice?’

“ ‘Yes’ answered the scribe, ‘very.’

“He walked down the steps and across the street. The window where the fond couple sat was partly open. As he passed along through the morning air, he heard ‘kiss your baby.’ The sound of sweet osculation followed the words.

“The reporter walked on.”

“Kiss Your Baby : Two Souls With But a Single Thought : Two Hearts That Beat as One.” Hamilton Spectator. April 14, 1883

“DUCK SHOOTING – Ducks are plentiful at the beach just now, and are found in large numbers in the open water at the piers, bay side and near to the waterworks. The birds are quite tame and easily got at. During last week John Dynes bagged 125, and another sportsman killed 17 on Saturday.”

Hamilton Spectator. April 16, 1883.

1883 - March - 5

“Each succeeding year gives evidence of the dying out of the display which formerly characterized the celebration of the anniversary of St. Patrick. Not only in Hamilton, but all over America, the day is now celebrated like a religious than a national holiday.  In Hamilton, the flags, bands and banners which have attended the celebration have entirely disappeared.”
“Ireland’s Patron Saint : A Quiet Celebration of the Anniversary in Hamilton”¹
          Hamilton Spectator.  March 17, 1883
          Early in the morning of St. Patrick’s day, 1883, members of the Emerald Beneficial association, Sarsfield Branch No. 1, of Hamilton, gathered at their hall on James street and marched in procession to St. Patrick’s church to attend high mass.
          Upon returning to the hall, prominent members of the Emerald Association addressed their fellow members. In his speech, Mr. James Henigan, president of the association, talked of the conversion of Ireland to Christianity by St. Patrick. He also referred to the old-time displays on St. Patrick’s day, which had thankfully been done away with, to the benefit of the proper observance of the day.
          Mr. George Nelson echoed the president’s thoughts:
          “He was opposed to parading in the streets on St. Patrick’s day as it created an ill-feeling and did no good to those who took part in it.”¹
                Later in the day, the Emerald Beneficial association sponsored a concert and lecture at the Academy of Music. The musical portion of the evening was opened by a selection of Irish airs played by the 13^th band. Also featured was Miss. M. E. Graham who sang “Take Me Home, Jaime Dear” and “O Bay of Dublin.”
          Following the concert , Hamilton alderman Cornelius Donovan came on the stage to introduce the featured speaker of the evening. In his introduction, the aldermen boldly stated that he was pleased to be an honorary member of the Emerald Beneficial association :

“That they aimed at religious improvement was evident from the fact of their assiduous attention to the duties of the Church, and to intellectual improvement as they had already laid the foundation of a first-class library and a reading room in connection therewith.” ²

² “Ireland’s Patron Saint : Concert and Lecture” Hamilton Spectator. March 19, 1883.

A lecture was then delivered by Mr. Edward Furlong on St. Patrick and his Sons.

On Saturday, March 17, 1883, the Salvation Army held its weekly knee drill and exhortation in front of the city hall, provoking the usual reaction:

“They were surrounded and following by a howling mob, and the words and air of the hymns were indistinguishable in the din that was raised by the camp followers.”³

³ “Death and Glory Boys : Fierce Battles With the Enemy in This City” Hamilton Spectator. March 19, 1883.

The success of the Salvation Army since its arrival in Hamilton had been mixed. Captain Wm. Freer, “the Hallelujah Sledgehammer,” in his weekly letter to the Army’s newsletter wrote :

“Engagement after engagement with the enemy has taken place in this station; he has been fighting hard here.. We have a live, subtle and deceitful devil in Hamilton. I do hate the devil with a more and more perfect hatred, especially the underneath, subtle devil. There has been too much of that slip-shod soft, weak, ungodly teaching in this city, which has resulted in rocking this fighting in the arm of the wicked one.”¹

Captain Freer was transferred to St. Thomas and on March 18, 1883, his replacement, Captain Mary Pilgrim was presented to the Hamilton troops for the first time as captain at a public meeting of the Army held at the Academy of Music:

“The recruits told their stories, and exhorted others to be saved, as they were. In the back seats, young men were flirting with young girls. Boys were reading dime novels of the “Daring Detective and Steel Eye the Scout” style and spitting tobacco on the floor. Salvation soldiers patrolling the aisles managed to keep pretty good order. There was considerable excitement and a brisk trade was done in selling songbooks and the War Cry.”³

On March 22, 1883, an article appeared in the Spectator describing the preparations that had been made by the Hamilton Choral Society for the performance of the oratorio, The Messiah, at Centenary Church:

“The chorus numbers two hundred, and with the band of over forty performers and the large organ of the Centenary church, the choral work should be grandly done.” ⁴

⁴ “Music and Drama : The Messiah” Hamilton Spectator. March 22, 1883.

In connection with the upcoming performance of the Hamilton Choral Society, a writer for the Spectator described how the society came to be organized :

“At first, the idea was simply to organize a chorus and perform the Messiah, and then if all was well to organize a choral society. The chorus came together late in January in Wesley church school room, and a provisional committee was appointed and rehearsals went on. It soon became evident that now was the time to organize the society. A meeting of business and  men was thereupon called, and resulted in the establishment of the Hamilton Choral Society, with a business committee composed of some of the leading professional men of Hamilton. Rehearsals were carried on regularly, the services of many of the best amateurs and professional players of the city being enlisted for the good of the cause.”⁴

In criticizing the performance of the Messiah on Good Friday, 1883 at the Centenary church, the Spectator was reluctant to be too hard on the performers as the chorus and orchestra were newly organized :

“Taken as a whole the performance was creditable to all concerned, and promises well for the future success of the society. We sincerely hope that from this good beginning our choral society will work on and up until they reach the standard that they should reach, and have shown themselves capable of reaching by the excellence of the work they have done already in proportion to the time they have been in preparation. Unduly flattering and promiscuous praise will do them more harm than good.”⁵

⁵ “The Messiah : Hamilton Choral Society” Hamilton Spectator. March 24, 1883.

Tuesday evening, March 27, 1883 at the Grand Opera House was the time set for an athletic exhibition on the stage usually for used by dramatic or musical players, rather than athletes. The exhibition was held under the combined patronage of the Nautilus and Leander rowing clubs, plus the Hamilton Football and Cricket clubs:

“But although the patronage of such splendid organizations as these was a good deal in favor of the entertainment, it was the hard work of Chief Stewart and the other members of the Hamilton police force and the laudable object that made the finest affair of the kind that ever took place a brilliant success.”⁶

⁶ “Assault at Arms : A Large Audience, a Successful Show and Worthy Object” Hamilton Spectator. March 28, 1883.

After the opening overture performed by the Thirteenth band, Chief Stewart appeared on stage and was greeted with great applause:

“He said that he felt immensely gratified at meeting so large and fashionable an audience. Hitherto these entertainments have been in bad hands, and many who would have liked to be present at them remained away because the managers of them did not care for anything but that the curtain should ring down on a well-filled treasury. The performances hitherto had been simply hippodromes. He wanted it distinctly understood that this entertainment was not a hippodrome.” ⁶

The program began with an exhibition by five members of the Queen’s Own Rifle gymnastic team.

The most notable feature of program was the tug-of-war between four Hamilton policemen and four of their brother officers from Toronto:

“The teams grasped their respective ends of the cable and planted their rubbered feet on the resined floor. The struggle was short, but exciting, and in the space of five seconds, the Hamilton men were pulled over the mark. A tremendous cheer followed and the curtain went down.

“But the audience was not satisfied with one trial, and the curtain rolled up discovering the teams in position, each on the end of the line opposite the one previously taken. Another pull, and again the Hamilton men went over the line.⁶

Sergeant-Major Morgans of the Kingston Military College performed a series of feats of swordsmanship including the following:

“Cutting an unresisting sheet of paper, cutting a heavy bar of lead standing on end on a stool, cutting ribbons and handkerchiefs by laying them across the sword and dexterously swinging the weapon, cutting potatoes placed on the head and back of Chief Stewart without injury.”⁶

Chief Stewart also boxed a few rounds with a professional fighter by the name of Progg. As recorded by the Spectator man in attendance, the chief got in “some good taps, while dexterously defending himself.”⁶

There was also a fencing contest between Professor McGregor and Chief Stewart :

“The Professor succeeded in scoring more hits than the chief but the latter showed himself an adept with the foil.”⁶

The entertainment was a financial success, according to the Spectator:

“The police library is a very worthy object for the large proceeds.”⁶,

1883 March - 4

On March 10, 1883, the final chapter of the Brotherly Union conflict was reached in the Hamilton Police with Magistrate Cahill chastising the members of the society as follows: “if you can’t conduct the business of your meetings more orderly, you had better disband altogether.”
          The magistrate then proceeded to fine all the participants in the dispute two dollars each.
         
          “The professional whiskey informers from Toronto, the hirelings of the license inspector, did not confine their attentions to the saloons, hotels, and grocery stores. Acting, no doubt upon the declarations of their employer, they used all the means in their power to induce a couple of druggists to beak the law.”¹

¹ “The Whiskey Informers : Baldwin and Fisher Turn Their Attention to the Drug Store” Hamilton Spectator. March 10, 1883.

          R. N. Taylor and Co., druggists at the store on the corner of John and Main streets, were charged with selling liquor in a smaller quantity than allowed by law. Mr. Blaicher, a senior partner in the firm, appeared in the police court to plead not guilty to the charge.
          The informer supposedly had given a tinsmith named Nelson Taylor an eight-ounce bottle and a quarter to get liquor at the drug store, which Taylor was successfully in accomplishing.
          Blaicher claimed that he sold liquor regularly to Taylor because supposedly Taylor’s wife was ill. Blaicher also claimed that it was difficult to distinguish an eight ounce bottle from a six ounce bottle unless they had been stood side by side.
          As there was some doubt that Taylor had actually bought the liquor at Taylor’s Drug Store, the magistrate remanded the case to allow him time to consider his decision.
          The following day, another liquor case involving the work of a professional informer was heard in the Hamilton Police Court.
          The grocery store owned by James Thompson, located at the corner of King and Catharine streets, had been the location where a purchase of a small quantity of liquor by a female whiskey informer who appeared in court, “dressed in black, with her not very beautiful face half concealed by a crepe veil.”²

² “A Female Whiskey Informer : Who Gives Crooked Testimony in Crooked Liquor Cases” Spectator March 12, 1883

          The whiskey informer proved to be troublesome, even belligerent, while on the stand, even when giving her identity, saying “ Buck’s the proper name, but some people outs it Buckingham.”²
                The grocer, Thompson, swore that the lady had never been given liquor at his store, and that her real name was Saunders. He went to say that she had run up a large bill with him, and had never paid it.
          Mrs. Buckingham testified that the grocer was wrong and that he was mistaking her for her sister.
          After the magistrate adjourned the case with making a decision, the newspaper reporters spoke to Mrs. Buckingham :
          “ ‘Does your sister look  anything like you?’ was asked.
          “ ‘Yes, she looks very much like me.’
          “ ‘How old is she?’
          “ ‘ Twenty.’
          “ ‘You must be much older than that. What’s your age?’
          “ ‘Twenty six.’

“ ‘Only 26; and you say you have been 11 years married?’

“ ‘ Yes, you see when I was – let me see – 15, I ran away with Mr. Buckingham, and married him.”

“ ‘Buckingham is a colored man, isn’t it?’²

Mrs. Buckingham hesitated before saying no, but seeing that the reporters seemed to know about her husband, she said, “Well, you know, he’s kind of mulatto-like, not black.”²

Another case of note was on the docket of the Hamilton Police Court of March 12, 1883. Magistrate Cahill was presented with Vincenzo and Francis Nucci, who were charged with assaulting and stabbing William Smith who had been a customer in their peanut store on James Street North.

Smith had apparently entered the store, loudly demanded and received 10 cents worth of peanuts. He refused to pay.

Smith then jumped the counter and struck Vincenzo on the head. While a boy named Joseph Napier ran for the police, the Nucci brothers went after Smith, and bodily threw him out of their store.

Detective McKenzie arrived at the scene just as Smith had been sent flying out of the store and across the sidewalk. Smith was bleeding profusely from what appeared to be stab wounds.

At the police court hearing on the incident, prominent Hamilton lawyer Henry Carscallen defended the Nucci brothers. The lawyer successfully argued that there was no proof that a knife had been used and that his clients had been severely provoked.

Magistrate Cahill found ruled that the Nucci brothers were not guilty of any of the charges laid against them.

On March 12, 1883, an angry letter to the editor appeared in the Spectator complaining about the methods by which the Boston Gem gallery, a local photographic firm, was disposing of the duplicates of photographs taken at their studio. The surplus photographs were being dumped into one of the gullies in the north of the city :

“I can assure you it is not at all pleasing to a respectable person to have their photographs handled and looked at by all kinds and classes of people who may obtain them. I understand that in a certain factory near one of these gullies, there is a number of these ‘gems’ placed on the wall.”³

³ “Gems Cast  in a Gully” Hamilton Spectator. March 12, 1883

The next day, a response from the Boston Gem Gallery appeared in the Spectator. J. S. Simmonds, proprietor of the firm, tried to explain the matter as follows :

“We make eighteen Gems and give the customer the best fourteen out of the eighteen. The extra pictures have accumulated very fast lately. We put them with our sweepings and hired a drayman to haul them to an out of the way place. Send the address of the factory mentioned to the gallery and we will secure and destroy those Gems.”⁴

⁴ “Gems in a Gutter” Hamilton Spectator. March 13, 1883

On March 15, 1883, internationally famous actress, Elizabeth Langtry, “the Jersey Lily,” arrived in Hamilton to act in a performance of the play, “She Stoops to Conquer” at the Grand Opera House.

Because Mrs. Langtry did not like staying in what she termed “rubbishy” hotels in the cities she visited, she travelled in a private railway car which was transported from city to city attached to already scheduled trains, and was then parked on a siding near the station of the city in which she was to perform.

When it was first heard that the famous actresses’ private car had arrived at Hamilton’s Stuart street depot, a substantial number of citizens went there hoping to get a glimpse of Lily Langtry, widely considered to be a ‘professional beauty.’ :

“But the lady’s face is her fortune, and the young men and women were disappointed, nor did they feel much consoled with the thought that they might see Langtry in the evening at the reasonable rate of three dollars a peep.”⁵

⁵  “A Peep Show : Arrival of Jersey Lily – a Scene at the Station”

Hamilton Spectator . March 15, 1883

Instead of seeing the world-famous actress, those who gathered at the station only saw some of the other actresses in the touring company :

“It was intensely amusing to see sundry hideous members of the company posing at the car windows, each laboring under the impression that she was transcendentally beautiful, and that the mob mistook her for Langtry. The airs which some of these ugly young women put on were the occasion of much merriment on the part of the spectators.”⁵

Lily Langtry let it be known that she would make herself available to be interviewed by the Spectator:

“She was informed that that sort of thing would cost her fifteen cents a line – the customary rate for actresses’ interviews.

“ ‘But,’ insinuated the lady, ‘I am not an actress.’ This with the word ‘actress’ accentuated to indicate that she was none of the ordinary everyday who play for money.

“ ‘No, I have heard that you are not,’ acquiesced the reporter, forgetting his gallantry in his desire to be truthful.”⁵

According to the Times’ reporter who attended Lily Langtry’s first Canadian appearance at Hamilton’s Grand Opera House, there was a fashionable, full house on hand :

“Mrs. Langtry has no cause to be dissatisfied with her first reception at the hands of the Canadian public. Seldom, if ever, has the Grand Opera House held such a magnificent audience as that which greeted the appearance of the celebrated beauty last night. The house was crowded with the elite of the city and the surrounding towns, and the audience was warmly appreciative, sympathetic, responsive to every touch of wit, and humor, and would have been indulgent if there had been many faults to indulge; but the performance throughout was singularly free from serious faults”⁶

⁶ “Amusements : Mrs. Langtry’s First Bow to a Canadian Audience : A Flattering Reception” Hamilton Times. March 16, 1883.

The Spectator review of Mrs. Langtry’s performance as Miss Hardcastle in the play was mixed:

“Miss Langtry is a very unequal actress. At times, she rises to excellence; at times she falls below mediocrity. The representation certainly pleased the audience, which, attracted by the fame of the Jersey Lily’s beauty, was entertained by the play. The lady cannot be credited with extraordinary talent, nor would it by any means be just to call her a failure.”⁷

⁷ “Music and Drama : Dramatic : The Jersey Lily” Hamilton Spectator. March 16, 1883.

While the Spectator theatre critic was less than fulsome in his praise of Lily Langtry’s performance, the audience at the Grand Opera House responded differently :

“Three times Mrs. Langtry was called before the curtain, and repeated demonstrations throughout the performance gave evidence of general and continued satisfaction.”⁷

The Times’ critic spend little effort commending on the renowned actresses’ performance, instead focusing on her appearance:

“As it is by her beauty that the Jersey Lily has achieved her celebrity and since it is Mrs. Langtry the beauty, far more than Mrs. Langtry the actress, that the public throng to see, it is but fair to criticize the lady’s appearance.

“ ‘Is this the face that launched a thousand ships? Cried Marlowe’s Dr. Fautus when the magic of Mephistopheles revealed to him the countenance of Helen of Troy; and no doubt the thought that flashed across the minds of the audience when Mrs. Langtry emerged from the wings into the glare of the footlights was, ‘And is this the face that has been so talked of and painted and photographed and praised for years past ?’

“Though Mrs. Langtry’s beauty, when she first appeared, was set off by rich and elgant costume, the first feeling of the spectators was one of disappointment; but this feeling wore away in the course of the performance, and there is no doubt that the lasting impression that was left on the minds of nearly all who saw her was favorable.

“If a person fresh from the performance were asked if he thought Mrs. Langtry a really beautiful woman, he would pause and reflect a moment before he could reply with certainty.”⁶

About ten blocks away from the Grand Opera House, and just a few hours after the glittering scenes prompted by the appearance of the Jersey Lily, a terrible tragedy took place.

The opening of the Times’ account of the disaster reads as follows :

“One of the saddest and most harrowing events that it has been the duty of the Hamilton press to chronicle occurred in the city last night at the house of Alexander Allan, a signalman on the Grand Trunk.

“The house is a small frame structure on Macnab street – No. 300. The family has been unfortunate. On Monday last, the eldest son, John, had his arm broken while at work in the Ontario Cotton Mill, and on the following day, Mr. Allan himself had his arm broken by a fall on James Street.

When the family retired for the night, Alexander Allan, his wife and John slept in a room on the ground floor of the small home, while just above them in another small room slept the other four children in the family – Lydia, Willie, George and Jennie, aged 13, 7, 5, and 3 respectively.

Lydia told her story to a Times’ reporter the following morning:

“ ‘In the night,’ she said, ‘I woke up and felt dreadful sick. My head was throbbing and burning and I felt sick at my stomach. I think it was about 4 or 5 o’clock when I heard someone stirring in the room below. Later on, one of my little brothers came over to our bed crying. He said, ‘Oh Liddy, I’m so sick.’ We were all sick. I got up at last, and came down stairs. It was ten minutes to eight when I came down. I went into the room where my father, mother and brother were, but could hardly enter for the gas that filled the room.

“ ‘My brother John  was lying on the little bed then, just as you see him now. His hands were shut tight and resting on his breast. My mother was sitting on a chair leaning over the head of John’s bed, with her head resting on her arm. Her head was near my brother’s. My father was lying on the big bed, making, oh, such terrible noises, as if her were in great pain. I saw that my brother was dead, and I was so frightened that I ran over to Mrs.Donough’s in my night dress and told her that Johnny was dead, and that I couldn’t wake my mother. Then Mrs. Donough and other neighbors came in.”⁸

⁸ “Suffocated : A Mother and Son Killed by Coal Gas : The Father Near Death’s Door : Narrow Escape of the Rest of the Family : A House of Mourning”

Hamilton Times. March 16, 1883.

The times reporter who recorded Lydia’s harrowing tale, noted that the “pitiful story with many sobs and tears by the poor child, who, in addition to her other misfortunes, is afflicted with constitutional lameness.”⁸

The cause of the disaster was not hard to determine. The house was heated by a self-feeding coal stove of a very cheap make. The sliding top had been inadvertently left slightly open, allowing the free escape of the coal gas into the home, instead of it being forced up the chimney. In addition a back damper on the stove was found to be closed, while the front damper was open, making the escape of the gas even more intense.

As the Hamilton times was about to got to press in the afternoon it was learned that the father, although still listed as being in critical condition at the hospital, was slowly improving that that strong hopes for his recovery were being entertained .

Dr. White quickly concluded that an inquest on the two deaths was not needed, as the circumstances causing the unhappy affair were obvious.