Many of Old North’s records are held at the Massachussetts Historical Society.

Old North: 1911 Renovations. Box 21, Folder 17

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, Nov. 1, 1911

I was extremely pleased to hear, as I did the other day through Mr. Robert Gardiner, of your success in getting control of Christ Church. I shall be only too pleased to give my services in connection with the work that is necessary to put this church in proper condition. I look upon it not only as a duty but as a priviledge, and feel honoured that you should have asked me to take charge of this work.

R. Clipston Sturgis to Mr. James E. Stone, Nov. 9, 1911

I have the letter of the 8th about Christ Church and will inform you when the heating specifications are ready for your committee, to look over.

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, Nov. 16, 1911

Until I have further information I am somewhat at a loss as to what to advise. I can see nothing in the way of pews that would have anything to recommend it historically except a return to the original box pews, and this would be wholly out of keeping with the services of the church or the use to which this particular church is put. There is nothing either historical or practical in favour of retaining the present pews. On the other hand if the pews are wholly removed the interior will lose much of its historical character. To a certain extent this might be restored by replacing the present pulpit and reading desk with something more in keeping with the period of the church itself, and yet even here we could not reproduce the old work, even if we found any record of what it was, as combined pulpit, reading, and clerk’s desk is hardly of much practical use today. It would seem as if it would be necessary to sacrifice some historical interest for the practical usefulness of the church, and put in a new level floor free from all pews, replace the chancel fittings of the seventies with those of better design, provide the building with chairs, and count on its general architectural character for its interest.

R. Clipston Sturgis to Mr. James E. Stone, Nov. 18, 1911

Sturgis wants to know if the older records have information about the pews:

… as it is a particular thing that he is looking for connected with the work that was done at the time wen the pews were changed from square pews to the present form. At that time there must have been some structural change made in the floor, and if the records contain any detailed account … I might very readily find the information for which I am looking.

Bids will be held until Rice & Bennet can make an estimate.

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, Dec. 18, 1911

The church must have been closed, and they were trying to decide if repairs should begin in late 1911, or be put off.

… I do not want to begin it piecemeal, that is for the sake of those who are contributing, for the sake of the committee, and on my own part, I think the undertaking should be definite and complete in its items and we should know clearly what the total expenditure is to be before any further work is undertaken.

If therefore it is desired to open the church for services now and continue them until spring, perhaps Easter, I cannot see any objection to such proceeding.

Proprietors of Pews to Bishop Lawrence, Dec. 29, 1911

… Voted that the election of the Bishop as Treasurer of the Repair Fund be ratified and approved, and that he be authorized to make payments from said fund for purposes of the Church henceforth in his discretion. …

R. Clipston Sturgis to James E. Stone, Feb. 3, 1912

Confirming that the new heating works, and planning the next steps:

I have careful photographs of the interior of the church which will enable me to make scale drawings, and I expect very shortly to be able to present a scheme for the decoration of the interior of the building, and the repair of the exterior.

J. Fred Howarth (Clerk of Committee on Repairs) to Bishop Lawrence, Dec. 29, 1911

Report on repairs on 193 Salem Street.

Old North: 1911 Renovations. Box 21, Folder 18

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, June 4, 1912

I have not however been able to find any authoritative information at to the original arrangement of the pews, and until this is done it is impossible to estimate, even approximately, the cost of taking them out and rearranging. I should think it very probable that the removal of the present upper floor, which appears to be an independent super-structure, would give some clue to the exact arrangement of the original pews, and their dimensions, and this would enable me to estimate with some accuracy the rebuilding of the pews, and also, which is more important, would enable me to lay out the pulpit and reading desk so that these also could be estimated accurately. I have not as yet got any information as to what the original pulpit was, and if we find it impossible to get a record of this I presume we would follow a contemporaneous type, as I did at Newburyport.

… would make a total of $13500.00. I think I am safe in saying this is a very conservative figure, and that on each item we have probably an outside figure. I realize this is a considerable amount, but I do not know of anything that could well be omitted.

Bishop Laurence to R. Clipston Sturgis, June 5, 1912

Short note to schedule a time to meet in person.

… for while we technically have not the power, whatever we would say would go with the Vestry. …

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, June 11, 1912

I have been completely over the the tower and spire of the Christ Church this morning. The whole of the woodwork of the spire is in fairly good condition, and has been repainted within a short time. It is dark grey in color, and in that respect is unsatisfactory. I should think however it might very well be left for a year or two and then painted two coats and brought to a color nearly white. …

… The paneling at the sides of the church gieves what is probably an accurate record of the original position of the pews. …

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, June 24, 1912

Budget estimates and initial investigations

… We have taken up the floor and some of the pews in the church and find everything exactly as we had anticipated, the old aisles, the old paneling at the sides, marks of where the pews were originally. I have laid out the new pulpit and reading desk, the vicar’s stall, and the lecturn. …

In addition to the things that are noted above it will be necessary to do some slight repainting to the woodwork which comes in connection with the brick walls on the outside, particularly where we removed the clapboards, and I have employed Sanby to do this work by the day. There will also be a slight expense in connection with changing the heating apparatus we put in last winter to suit the vestry and the aisles in their new positions. …

William Laurence to Mr. Bolton, Boston Athenaem, July 11, 1912

I assume that you, like most busy men, have spare time. Wouldn’t it be a pleasant thing for you to amuse yourself during that spare time in following our your own suggestion of gathering ideas for tablets for Christ Church in order that we may have some of thim in place next autumn. I could imagine for instance that somewhere in the porch there might be a large wooden tablet with the main features of the Church painted printed (?) in black paint on it. There could also be the Major Pitcairn tablet with the story connected with him. Then, there might well be a Paul Revere tablet giving the true story, if there is one which no one can dispute, of his relations with Christ Church. I think that the people are interested in reading tablets which have the story as well as the bald facts. No doubt other suggestions will occur to you. You may remember also my suggestion in regard to the organ. I enclose a letter which I have just written to Mr. Kellen.

Enclosure: Copy of letter to Mr. Kellen

… I was down there a few days ago and very much interested in the changes we are making in the Church and tenement nearby. I hope that we shall have a little oasis of old Americanism right in the midst of that Italian population, and that the people there will be brought into connection with it. I have asked Mr. Bolton of the the Athenaeum, who is now a much interested senior warden of Christ Church to request the architects to turn to the organ builder and get from him three figures somewhat like the following: … we hope we are to have good music there occaisionally on Sunday afternoons with perhaps a cello or a violin or something of that sort for the Italians without religious service, we would of course be glad to have a better organ. …

R. Clipston Sturgis to Mr. Bolton, July 16, 1912

Estimates and accepted bids. Interior painting has been estimated at $2000 but has not been bid.

Copy of letter from Hock-Hastings Company to R. Clipton Sturgis, July 16, 1912

We would advise strongly the addition of a Kinetic blower or an Orgoblo to furnish wind for the organ and do away with the present method of hand blowing. The cost of applying such a blowing plant assuming that the current is direct voltage 110 would be $235.

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, July 16, 1912

I enclose herewith blue print showing showing (sic) general plan of Christ Church as rearranged, and the proposed position of the pulpit and reading desk and lectern. You will see that I have followed the lines of the old pews for the lectern and reading desk. … and a pulpit which follows very closely the lines of the pulpit in Trinity Church, Newport, but which has no canopy or sounding-board over it. it seemed to me that the position of the pulpit was such as to make it better to omit the sounding-board, which would come close to the gallery. If you think it necessary of desirable to have the sounding board I should think it would be wise to have the pulpit moved nearer to the center of the church.

Whipple, Sears, and Ogden to Bishop Lawrence, July 23, 1912

Will there be enough pews for all the current pew owners?

Mr. Sturgis answers this in the affirmative and also adds that it is too late to make any changes in the work since the contract has been executed and all of the pews have been removed.

Old North: 1911 Renovations: Correspondence, Aug-Dec 1912. Box 21, Folder 19

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, August 9, 1912

A more thorough and extended examination of the space above the ceiling led to the taking up of some flooring, and under this we found the beam which supported the canopy over the pulpit and a hole in it, therefore we know definitely that there was such a canopy, and the actual position of the pulpit. …

While making this examination of the roof frame they discovered a space that enabled the men to get in above the work that Shubell Bell did in the chancel, and there discovered in position the fine pine paneling, marks of which we had discovered lower down. To remove all the work that Mr. Bell put in and restore the church to its original condition would, in my judgement, be a very great improvement, but it would make change in the appearance of the chancel that would seem like a violent one from the conditions with which the old residents have been long familiar, and they might resent it…

We discovered also the original framing showing how the old stairs went to the gallery, and this old arrangement is so great an improvement over the present one, and will add so much to the appearance of the church on the inside that is seems highly desirable to make this change even if it does cost a little more money.

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, August 23, 1912

Hardly do I make a statement in regard to Christ Church but what something new turns up which involves additional expense. I really feel ashamed to be obliged so frequently to tell you that more money is needed. I told you on Saturday that I thought on the shole I should not advise the expense that would be involved in taking down the elaborate, but rather commonplace, architecture which Mr. Bell gave, and restoring the original panels of the chancel. I find now however that wehn this work was done they pulled down the outside wall of the apse and replace the wall that was about 24 inches thick with one which, now that is is uncovered, proves to be only 4 inches of brick, part of this above the vestry, which we pulled down, but now a considerable proportion of it is above the roof, and quite apart from the fact that is is entirely inadequate to carry its own weight, and is unsafe, is is of course very inadequate protection against the weather. There is no question therefore that this must be rebuilt, and if we are to rebuild it it is far better to rebuild it on the original semi-circular line of the old apse, …

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, September 4, 1912

The tablets suggested by Mr. Bolton are nine in number, and they vary from 17 to 100 words, and the cost will be dependent largely upon the number of words, forty cents a letter would be an outside price…

Another discovery at the church, which will affect the work in the chancel but not, I hope, the cost, is that there was originally a great east window, the jambs of which are clearly shown in the remains of the brick, and the dimensions of which will fit the space of the two centre panels. I am restudying what this window should be and will at once get it figured. I am also attempting to get a little more assistance from the City of Boston in the way of a present of brick for the rebuilding of the chancel wall. If I am succesful with the brick deal, and if, as I hope, the sash will cost not more than the wall, we will make a saving rather than an extra here.

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, September 7, 1912

In writing the Johnson Marble Co., whose address is 135 Malden Street, I suggested that possible their interest in Boston and in this church would prompt them to offer to give one of these tablets. They wrote at once to say they would be delighted to do so, that their Mr. T. J. Johnson had been in business for nearly six years in the neighborhood of the old North Church. I think it would be much appreciated by Mr. Johnson if you would yourself write and thank him for this.

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, October 26, 1912

In the middle of a series of letters giving updates of the finances, one little note about the painting:

Sanby’s general work on the church and on the apse remains as state in September except for the fact that wen we began to wash off the ceiling and walls preparatory to painting we found the necessity of reskimming portions of the ceilings and walls.

and the rear pews:

… and this complete bills to date amount to $5044.91, as given on this certificate, and includes putting in those rear pews, the expense of which I did not want, but which Bolton was very anxious to have, the corner seats and some miscellaneous items.

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, November 9, 1912

After I had crossed off the expense of planting at Christ Church as the Mayor had offered to do this on behalf of the City, and had crossed off the expense of brick for paving as the Mayor had offered to give us old brick from the paving department, I was surprised to recieve a bill from the paving department for eighteen thousand brick at $7.00 a thousand, and to get word from Mr. Sullivan of the Public Grounds Department that the planting would cost over $100, and that he could not go ahead with it without special authorization to spend that amount. When I took these two matters up with the Mayor it was just before election, and at first I could get no information at all, yesterday I was informed that the City could not give the brick byt that if we disregarded the bill it would never be pressed for payment, and that the City could not furnish plants and set them as this would involve the purchase of material that they did not have in their greenhouses, and this bill would have to be paid, moreover there would be a bill for labor for planting and this also would have to be paid.

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, December 26, 1912

I trust you will not feel that Christ Church is a fair example of the business management of my office, of which as a rule I am rather proud. I have been dealing with the office of G.W. Morrison, which from the point of view of integrity and good workmanship is unequalled, but from the point of view of estimates and careful book-keeping has been prefectly and impossibly old-fashioned. George Morrison was an old man, he died in November and the work was conducted by his shop, and notwithstanding the fact that I have insisted on accounts from them every week, and have persistently all through the summer called to their attention that they were charging as extra things that were in the original outside limit I have never yet succeeded in pinning them down to anything definite. At the present moment the bills far exceed the amounts stated to you in August, and again in September, and yet at that time the work was all settled, and there have been no items added since then except a few of minor importance. When I reported to you in Sept, on the the 18th, we thought Morrison’s work would amount to $5200. I had the same impression and it seemed justified when I wrote you the 26th of Oct. and yet the Bills now add up to $7500.

He continues, listing all the items whose cost exceeds the original estimate.

Old North: 1911 Renovations: Correspondence, 1913. Box 21, Folder 20

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, January 3, 1913

The enclosed certificate for Rice & Bennett, the heating contractors, will I am sure seem excessive to you but after going over the work carefully I feel that it is justifiable.

Changes in the vestry, stairs, and pews required that much of the radiator work needed to be redone.

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, January 9, 1913

Review of bills from all subcontractors. Not satisfied with the largest accounts, but many contractors made donations:

Pettingell & Andrews provided “brackets that were made to correspond with the chandelier. … They furnished eight and are charging for but six.”

The Johnson Marble Co. provided the tablets: “The total cost is $437, and the company presented one of the larger ones, making their bill $377.”

P.S. In connection with the tablet I would say that Johnson’s figure includes setting the two tablets with the names of the rectors, and the plate for the Bay pew to be given by Mrs. Edwin Farnam Green cost $6.25.

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, January 10, 1913

Cost estimates for work on bells. The architect suggests that the materials be ordered from England:

Taking into consideration the fact that in ordering this material from England we would be getting exactly what we wanted with no chance of mistakes being made I think it would be best to accept Mears & Stainbank’s figure.

G. J. Buchanan Co. to Wm. Sanby, January 21, 1913

We enclose receipted bill for motor box in Christ Church. Please accept this as a small contribution to the restoration which is being so splendidly done.

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, January 31, 1913

Simply as a matter of record of what I have contributed to Christ Church I send receipted account for work in my office during the past nine months.

I should like to take this opportunity of thanking you for putting this work into my charge, and for the hearty cooperation in the work of yourself and Mr. Bolton and Mr. Sanby. I am sorry that the total cost of the work has exceeded the amount that was contemplated at the beginning, but work of this kind is extremely difficult to estimate, even approximately, and I think we may rest assured that the work has been well done and economically done, and that with the exception of a little reiteration on heating, it has been as carefully and economically handled as if all the work now executed had been laid out originally.

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, January 31, 1913

An account of the bill from Morrison for carpentry, which exceeded the original estimate.

Mr. Morrison made a definite agreement to do a definite amount of work at a sum not to exceed $3000. As soon as his first account came in, that is within a fortnight of the time when we had begun work, his bookkeeper began charging up items as extras which in my judgement were not extras but included in the original contract. … No attention at all was paid to my latters and requests, which were repeated at frequent intervals during the summer. Then George Morrison died, and it appears that nobody in his office knew that he had agreed to do this work within a definte figure. …

… a very small portion of the original woodwork of the pews could be used over again, and that instead of attempting to use anything that was defective it was promptly sent to the shop and duplicated with new material; that the backs of the pews, under a supposed order from my office, were made all new of paneled stock instead of plain boards; … We start therefore with the work estimated at $3000, costing over $3800.

…

… The big window was discovered, and this, instead of reducing the cost on the paneling on account of the amount omitted, actually made it cost more on the account of the difficulty of building the large curved jambs of the window. This item instead of being $700 was about $760.

The pews where were added I opposed as long as I could because I feared the expense of the work. Wehn it came up toward the end of the summer Bolton, from the antiquarian point of view, was very anxious that the restoration should be as accurate and complete as far as we could make it so, and these additional pews were ordered. There were 14, 4 in the center of the church, 3 on the right, 3 on the left at the front, and 4 at the rear, and they cost over $1100. Even this large amound is not I think unreasonable for the work that was involved, although it seems a large sum, one third of the original total, which included rebuilding 52 old pews.

The last page is an itemized list of costs including:

Chancel rail: $53.00 Frames for painting and tables of law: $25 Flag poles: $11 Misc. work including Bay Pew, removing carving on organ, replacing base in vestibule, carting, painting rear side of paneling, seats in corner of pews, etc.: $82

T.F. McGann & Sons Co. to Bishop Lawrence, February 3, 1913

Acknowledging receipt of $172.25, and returning $6.25 for the Bay Pew Tablet, which had already been paid for separately.

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, February 17, 1913

Handwritten note discussing the bills.

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, February 18, 1913

Irving & Casson billed in line with their original estimate, but well below their costs for the curtain. Sturgis recognizes their donation, and pays them more than they had billed.

I enclose certificate for $293.50 for Irving & Casson, for the curtain and miscellaneous items. Their approximate estimate for the curtain was $194.97, the actual cost was $285.40. I have written a personal letter to Mr. Casson, copy of which I enclose.

I realize it is a little like taking him by the throat, but at the same time I think he ought to be pleased to be attacked in this fashion, and I trust he will accept it cheerfully.

Copy of R. Clipston Sturgis to Mr. Casson, February 18, 1913

… I see by your bill that it has cost you about $100 more than that, and you will therefore I am sure be delighted to join with a host of people who have done more than actually execute work at cost, but have given something as well to the good cause. …

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, March 5, 1913

Trying to finally resolve the bills from Morrison (woodwork) and Norwood (masonry). Sturgis believed the masonry on the chancel should cost less because the bricks were donated and the the window was discovered. Against this:

Norwood’s claim, as given me at second hand, is that the building up of the window jambs was more difficult work than the plain wall, and that he had to furnish and set some iron to tie the wall over the window, so that the lesser amound of brick was offset by the greater cost of labor.

On Morrison’s account, Sturgis is waiting for a decision from Bishop Lawrence.

They had an electric lantern, presumably in the tower, but are unhappy with it:

There is one other item unpaid, which is $50 for the lantern which was ordered, and which was to have been paid for by the Gas Company. You remember the circumstance. The lantern is complete in Krasser’s shop and has not been set because the electric company, who furnished the light and the standard free, furnished their own type, and stated to us that they would not furnish anything else. This matter I had hoped to take up with the Mayor, and see if he could not persuade the company to put up our lantern in place of the hideous thing there now. I have made a number of efforts to see the Mayor on this matter but without success. … I suppose we must pay for this although we have no place to put it unless we can have it substituted for the present electric dixture.

R. Clipston Sturgis to W.W. Morrison, Executor of the Estate of G.W. Morrison, April 26, 1913

I regret extremely that you do not feel inclined to accept my ruling in connection with the bill rendered on Christ Church and make contribution as suggested, as it forces me into the position, which I do not wish to take as an architect on the building, that the estate is not entitled to this amount, and that I am unwilling to authorize it. There was a definite agreement of an outside limit which was exceeded without any authority from this office.

I return herewith my certificate and would be much obliged if you would receipt and return same. I regret extremely that I am obliged to take this position but your note on your bill leaves me no alternative.

R. Clipston Sturgis to Bishop Lawrence, March 5, 1913

Some discussion of widening a door, but unclear where it is located. And finally:

As for Morrison’s account, it was definitely closed by your last cheque. I asked Morrison to accept my ruling graciously and make a merit of necessity and offer the $300 as a contribution towards Christ Church. As he declined to take this generous position I exercised the authority which I have as architect in control of the work and wrote him the enclosed letter. He has no recourse except to go to the courts, which I should think we would hardly be inclined to do with the evidence in my office so strong against him.