The Versatile Benjamin Latrobe

by James Wudarczyk - 2004

On one of the plaques commemorating the Allegheny Arsenal, there is a brief note, “Benjamin Latrobe, architect.” So while Latrobe is generally credited with the initial plans for the Allegheny Arsenal, few realize that he was truly a multi-talented man: linguist poet, play writer, architect, artist, songwriter, and engineer. This is attested by the fact that he left a legacy of 14 sketch books of 310 watercolors, pen and pencil sketches, 13 journals (1796-1820), and 19 letter books of more than 5,000 letters recorded by a polygraph, an early machine that makes simultaneous replicas. Yet, for all of his talent, he lacked business skills, and died in New Orleans on September 3, 1820, of yellow fever, bankrupt, scandal ridden and controversial. Since he was fluent in several languages Latrobe started his long and colorful career as a translator of books in his native England. His first wife died while they were still in Europe, so at the age of 29, he left England in 1796 to claim a parcel of land in Pennsylvania, which his mother left to him in her will. However, his first stop in America was not Pennsylvania but rather Virginia. According to Sarah Booth Conroy in an article titled Architect to the Nation, “His Virginia journals (he was there for two years) are a wonderful mixture of gossip and controversy. He notes that, when he was on an overnight visit to Mount Vernon, George Washington served no supper. He tells how to tie up ones trousers to keep out the mosqitoes. He relates the mystery of the events leading up to the death of Richard Randolph, said to have been poisoned by one or both ladies in his ménage a trios. And he spends several pages on a family tree of John Rolfe and his wife, Pocahontas.

“During these years he also wrote a play for an actress with whom he was enamored. The theater burned down after one performance and a critic wrote that it was a ‘judgment on the house of prostitution committed on the state.

“Latrobe moved to Philadelphia in 1798, where he designed the Bank of Pennsylvania, the first Greek Revival building in the country, and married Mary Elizabeth Hazlehurst.”

Latrobe’s Philadelphia years deserve attention. While working on the Bank of Pennsylvania, Latrobe incorporated Thomas Jefferson’s concept that public buildings should include a classical element or look like an antique temple. Thus, Latrobe worked in the Greek Revival style – style that he would later make popular. Working with a liberal budget, the Bank of Pennsylvania had a domed circular banking hall, marble exterior with Greek Ionic Porticoes, and was surrounded with an enclosed garden. For this project, Latrobe was paid $4,000.00.

According to John C. Van Horne, “Benjamin Henry Latrobe erected Philadelphia’s first steam-powered waterworks which began operations in 1802. (This) was his greatest and most successful engineering work and one which in its own way was as influential in its own way as the Bank of Pennsylvania was in its. Philadelphia was a city of fifty thousand residents whose water was supplied from wells in the street. The situation was unsatisfactory because there was insufficient water to fight fire and clean streets, and because wells ran dry or turned foul from pollution, particularly in summer months. Contaminated water was also viewed as a cause of the epidemic and endemic diseases of the city, particularly yellow fever. Latrobe’s system used two huge steam engines. One, on the Schuylkill River drew water up the bank and into a basin, from where it flowed by gravity through a brick conduit beneath Chestnut Street to Centre Square, the site of present-day City Hall. There, a second steam engine raised the water into a cistern, from which the water was distributed by gravity through thirty thousand feet of wooden pipes to public hydrants and private homes. When the system began operation in 1801, Philadelphia residence could have fresh water piped into their homes for the first time in history at the modest cost of five dollars a year. ”

With the success of the Philadelphia water system, Latrobe’s reputation grew, and in 1801 he was contracted to under take a survey of the Susquehanna River to improve navigation.

While Latrobe’s concept worked well and added an architectural landmark to Philadelphia, the project incurred massive cost over-runs and left Latrobe in debt. The problem was compounded by the fact that Latrobe agreed to cover the notes of Nicholas Roosevelt, who was a builder of steam engines and who would later marry Latrobe’s daughter Lydia. Faced with financial ruin, Latrobe became very depressed, and it was only with the prospect of more work that Latrobe was able to recompose himself.

As might be expected, Latrobe was well acquainted with many of the prominent figures of American history, including James and Dolly Madison, James Monroe, Thomas Jefferson, Aaron Burn, Robert Fulton, and Gilbert Stuart.

Apparently Thomas Jefferson was well acquainted with Latrobe’s work and reputation because in 1803 Jefferson appointed Latrobe surveyor of public buildings in Washington. According to the Conroy account, there were differences of opinion between Jefferson and Latrobe on several issues. “When Jefferson suggested wood columns instead of stone for the House of Representatives, Latrobe replied, “The wooden column is one with which I will never have anything to do. On that you may rely. I will give up my office sooner than build a temple of disgrace to myself and Mr. Jefferson. ” Conway also contends that Latrobe also disagreed with Jefferson on extending one story wings extending east and west from the president’s home.

It is widely held that Latrobe, in spite of his differences of opinion with Jefferson, must have thought highly of the third president because he included a sketch of Jefferson in his portfolio of art. According to the news bulletin of the Maryland Historical Society, “The drawing is on thin paper measuring 5 1/8 by 4 1/8 inches, without watermark and badly foxed. It has been fully described Mr. Fiske Kimball, director of the Philadelphia Art museum, in his article ‘The Life Portraits of Jefferson and Their Replicas,’ which appeared in the Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, Vol. 88 (1944) p.497-534, as follows:

“Benjamin Henry Latrobe, the gifted architect whom Jefferson in 1803 made Surveyor of Public Buildings of the United States, made sketches from life of a number of celebrated characters.”

In 1813 Latrobe grew frustrated with the Washington establishment. Thus, he left for Pittsburgh, not to build an arsenal but to build steamboats. When Latrobe arrived in Pittsburgh, he and his family took dwelling in a house at the southeast corner of Grant and Second, which the rented from James O’Hara.

The Pittsburgh years almost appear as lost years in studies of Benjamin Henry Latrobe. For example, in volume three of The Journals of Benjamin Henry Latrobe 1799-1820 from Philadelphia to New Orleans, the authors in their chronology of this scholarly study, simply noted:

1813 October 31 Arrives with family in Pittsburgh as agent of Fulton’s Ohio steamboat company; job terminated in September 1814.

1814 January Completes preliminary designs for the John Peter Van Ness House, Washington.

1814 March Becomes contractor for the steam engine at woolen mill in Steubenville, Ohio.

1814 May 13 The steamboat Buffalo, constructed by BHL, is launched. Contracts to rebuild the burned U.S. Capitol.

The most comprehensive and definitive biography on Latrobe was written by Talbot Hamlin in 1955, and it remains to this day the most authoritative source on the renowned architect. In an examination of the Latrobe’s Pittsburgh years, one must turn to the Hamlin biography because he is one of the few authors who does not ignore this chapter in Latrobe’s life.

Some authors view Latrobe’s decision to come to Pittsburgh to build steamboats as a demotion in the career of the most talented architect in America. However, Latrobe recognized the value of steamboat service and believed that this was a way of restoring his family to financial stability. Even though steam power was a new technology in the early decades of the nineteenth century, Latrobe saw other men massing fortunes from the new technology, and he recognized that steamboats would allow for faster passenger service and could haul more freight. In addition, steam power made river navigation more feasible and more economical since boats would be able to navigate up the river as well as down the rivers.

While there is no doubt that Benjamin Latrobe missed Philadelphia and Washington society, he faced even greater obstacles than the lack of intellectual and artistic expression. Almost from the start the steamboat venture was destined to turn into the steamboat fiasco. Since he could not utilize existing facilities, he had to purchase a tract of land on the Monongahela from Colonel O’Hara and erected a machine shop. Because of the War of 1812, prices of goods and materials exceeded the original estimates. He also faced critical shortages of lumber and had to send men to the mountains to secure the lumber that he needed. In addition he was constantly plagued by money problems since he even borrowed the money he needed from Robert Fulton just to get him to Pittsburgh. Using figures calculated by Nicholas Roosevelt, Latrobe and Fulton estimated that the steamboat could be built for 20,000 to 25,000 dollars. Latrobe’s annual salary was set at 2,000 dollars plus one-third interest in the company.

Later Latrobe lamented to Fulton that the cost of each boat would be closer to 45,000 or 50,000 dollars, which was double the original estimate, and these costs exceeded the amount of dividend capital stated in the articles of incorporations of the Ohio Steamboat Navigation Company.

By May 17, no bank or financial would honor any drafts endorsed by Latrobe or Fulton. Five days later, Latrobe was begging for money since he had none to pay his 60 workers. By July, Fulton refused to correspond with Latrobe who still needed several thousand dollars to complete the project.

In addition to inflationary prices and a lack of funding from the parent company, Latrobe faced competition from other steamboat manufacturers. Faced with losing his workforce and suppliers, Latrobe advanced the Ohio Steamboat Navigation Company 5,000 dollars of his own money. So where did a penniless man secure such an enormous sum of money? The answer to this riddle is found in Hamlin’s biography, in which the author notes that since Latrobe was a pioneer in the field of steam engines he was able to secure outside contracts for engines.

Latrobe also took on contracting and architectural projects. He was paid 150 dollars on January 16, 1815, for designing a large house for Christian Cowan. Talbot Hamlin also indicated that Latrobe designed a home for William Foster. “In connection with the Foster house, Latrobe wrote his client on January 16, 1815: ‘I beg Mrs. Foster’s acceptance of the landscape herewith sent, representing such a house as she seemed to approve…. In the background I have imagined the appearance of your village of Lawrenceville with the Arsenal…. Should you resolve to build under my direction… working drawings will be required… If not, I will thank you to return me the plan and section.’”

In addition he completed a barge for a drunken boat builder and reaped a nice profit and he expanded a church for Dr. Herron. He also continued with projects outside of the city.

The largest project of note, however, was the great United States Arsenal near Pittsburgh. (It was not until the 1830’s before the facility acquired the name “Allegheny Arsenal.”) Although it may be debated as to how much involvement Latrobe had on this major undertaking, Hamlin notes,

Yet Latrobe did make certain elaborate drawings (dated October, 1814)-now in the Library of Congress-and the construction did go ahead. The arsenal still stands, in part; a comparison of the actual buildings and the Latrobe drawings, however, reveals more differences than similarities, although the general over-all shapes of some of the buildings agree. The preliminary drawings which he made are among the most brilliant of the architect’s designs; they are original, admirably fitted for their purpose, with clear, simple, and distinguished detail.

Among the rest of the buildings that remain, the storage warehouse and the powder magazine are the two that reveal the most of what seems the true Latrobe character. The beautiful masonry and the clarity of conception seen in both are remarkable, and the stepped cornice of the warehouse-in two projecting courses of squared stone blocks-is effective and expressive, just as the great gable coping stones (keyed up at the outside edge) of the powder magazine and its simple arched entrance have a character of exciting power. The gate posts in the surrounding wall of the arsenal, excellent in proportion and with strong, well-studied moldings and a successful handling of the rustication, may also have come direct from the architect’s drawing board. The non-commissioned officers’ quarters, with their low, inviting arches and the triple windows above, although without any recognizable details definitely attributable to Latrobe, seem somehow to have something of the directness and the common sense associated with the architect. No drawings of them are known to exist, but these features might well be based on simplifications of his designs, as is the general geometric composition of the whole layout.

Hamlin theorizes, “Thus it seems probable that Latrobe acted informally as consulting architect only and that Pope served as the draftsman for the first buildings as actually erected.”

With the advent of World War I, some of the arsenal buildings were demolished. However, as late as the 1930’s, some of the original structures were still standing and these are documented in Charles Morse Stotz’s Early Architecture of Western Pennsylvania.

According to Hamlin, “In Pittsburgh itself, except for the arsenal, everything of Latrobe has perished.”

Before leaving the topic of Latrobe one must turn to a book titled Houses and Money: The Domestic Clients of Benjamin Henry Latrobe.

Leonard K. Eaton compiled a study of several houses built by Latrobe for his domestic clients. When Eaton published his study, he noted, “In summary, then, we have a group of six clients whose houses seem magnificently adopted to the complex requirements set before the architect. They are, of course, only a small part of Latrobe’s total production in this branch of building art. Although he carried through about thirty dwellings from start to finish, he probably did remodeling and additions on an equivalent number. Of this substantial accomplishment only two houses survive in a condition which reasonably reflects his ideas and those of his clients.” This study includes the Edward and Betsy Shippen Burd House in Philadelphia (1801-1802), the John and Elizabeth Pope House in Lexington, Kentucky (1811-1814), “Brentwood” or the Robert Brent House in Washington, D.C. (1818), the John Peter and Marcia Van Ness House in Washington D.C. (1813-1816), Stephen Decatur House in Washington, D.C. (1817), and “Adena” or the Thomas Worthington House in Chillicothe, Ohio (1805-1807). What is interesting about this study is that one can see some of the similar characteristics of the Pope house and Tomas Worthington’s “Adena” incorporated into Latrobe’s proposed plans for the commander’s house at the Allegheny Arsenal.

Although Latrobe only designed one house in Lawrenceville- that being Foster’s White Cottage- he had a profound effect on the neighborhood, and long after the Greek Revival style ceased to be popular in the United States, houses of this style continued to be built in the community. In Landmark Architecture of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, eminent architectural historians, James D. Van Trump and Arthur P. Ziegler, Jr., cite five homes designed in the Vernacular Greek Revival: 257-40th Street (c. 1830-1850), 513 Carnegie Street (c. 1840-1850), 5300 McCandless Avenue (circa 1845), 186 Home Street (c. 1840-1850), and Modoc Alley (c. 1830-1840). They also cite Saint Mary’s Academy Building on 46th Street “with pilasters and corbelling, rather late Greek Revival in style.” They date this building to some time around 1850. While Van Trump and Ziegler mention these several buildings, it must be noted that there are other examples of such architecture hidden throughout Lawrenceville, with the last such structure having most likely been built circa 1864.

Although Latrobe was active in various enterprises in Pittsburgh trying to keep himself in money and the steamboat project alive, the Pittsburgh years were very bleak ones for Latrobe. On September 30, 1814, Fulton dismissed Latrobe as an agent of the company.

Van Horne summarized the feud between Fulton and Latrobe over design and costs associated with the steamboat “the Buffalo.” In “The Artist As Commentator,” James C. Van Horne wrote, “The issue of correct design was the subject of an acrimonious exchange between Fulton and Latrobe after the Buffalo incurred substantial cost overruns by the summer of 1814. Fulton argued that Latrobe should have examined the river and built a smaller boat, while Latrobe maintained that Fulton had prescribed the boat’s size and that, as agent, he was merely carrying out Fulton’s instructions. The conflict resulted in Latrobe’s dismissal as Fulton’s agent in September 1814, leaving Latrobe in severe financial straits. For a time Latrobe sought reconciliation with Fulton, for the Buffalo required only a small sum to be completed. That possibility, however, evaporated when Fulton died unexpectedly in February 1815.”

There are two interesting aspects of “the Buffalo.” Louis C. Hunter, in his study of steamboats, notes that early sleeping accommodations consisted primarily of berths, arranged in two tiers on either side of the saloon, which were separated only by curtains. “For most passengers, perhaps, these arrangements offered comfort enough, but from the beginning some provision was made for those who desired and could afford the luxury of private sleeping rooms. In addition to ordinary berths the Buffalo (1814) contained four state rooms.”

Also, Talbot Hamlin cites Hunter in a footnote, “The Buffalo and the uncompleted freight boat, the Harriet, were sold at a sheriff’s sale. Both boats were completed and were running profitably in the Cincinnati trade in the spring of 1817. By so little had Latrobe missed the chance of financial security.”

Latrobe left Pittsburgh at the end of 1814 because of financial problems and judgments against him in the steamboat debacle. He returned to his old job in Washington, where he was invited to help rebuild the Capitol after the British burned it. According to the Conroy account,

“Latrobe had private commissions in Washington as well, though his plan for Octagon House was rejected. He claimed that his design for St. John’s Church on Lafayette Square made religion popular. His Lafayette Square home for Stephen Decatur, the naval hero, is now, fittingly, the National Trust for Historic Preservation headquarters. Still standing is Christ Church, a small neighborhood chapel Latrobe designed on Capitol Hill.

“Latrobe left Washington again in 1817 to finish the Baltimore Cathedral and file for bankruptcy. He died in 1820 in New Orleans while completing the local waterworks.”

While the years following Latrobe’s departure from Pittsburgh deserve study, those last years of his life would take us past the initial purpose of this article; viz., Benjamin Latrobe’s Pittsburgh years.