The Availability of Lime and Masonry Constructionin New England: 1630-1733

PAUL B. JENISON

etween 1630 and 1733 New Eng- from two sources: mollusk shells and rare land witnessed the gradual de- deposits of natural limestone. Sea shells B velopment of masonry as a signifi- by far accounted for most of the early cant element in its building tradition. By supplies. Natural limestone deposits, dis- 1733 structures of brick and stone were covered at Providence in 1661 and at common. In the seventeenth century, Newbury in 1697, did not have an impor- however, masonry construction was not tant effect on regional availability until the always practical for a shortage of lime, early eighteenth century. vital to the making of strong mortars, Both shell and limestone have identical plagued builders. Wherever the crucial chemical properties. Natural limestone is lime was available, masonry quickly be- formed by the accumulation of sea shells came integrated with local building tradi- and other calcium-rich marine debris tions. In locations such as where solidified under great pressure over long there was no local abundance of lime, the periods. It is geologically defined as a class development of a vernacular masonry of rock containing at least 80% of carbon- style can be directly tied to the introduc- ates of calcium and magnesium. When tion of imported sources of mortar lime. calcified by burning, lime rocks and shells This article outlines the seventeenth and yield products that slake upon the addi- eighteenth century methods of producing tion of water. This calcification process mortar and the links that connect lime breaks the bonds between the calcium supplies with the emergence of local oxide, or lime, and the gaseous, foul- masonry traditions. smelling carbon dioxide. New Englands’ earliest mortars were While all lime used for building pur- made of mud. These were satisfactory poses had to be thoroughly burned, it was only for foundations and the interior not crucial for mortar lime to be pure, and portions of chimneys. The exterior parts it was commonly known as “lean lime.” of chimneys and exposed masonry work This was not the case with plaster lime, demanded hard mortar made of lime, or known as “fat lime,” which required a the work stood only until the next rain- higher calcium content achieved by care- storm. ’ This lime was scarce and expen- ful regulation of the calcification process. sive. In most locations only the wealthy Thus partially burned shells will be pres- could attempt large masonry projects. The ent in a shell lime mortar, but seldom known scarcity of lime, furthermore, found in a shell lime plaster.2 augmented the appearance of comfort, The methods of gathering and burning status, and authority the powerful sought lime in the seventeenth century were in their high style brick dwellings. simple enough, assuming a source could Seventeenth century lime was obtained be discovered. The most common source

21 22 Old- Time New England of shells were kitchen middens, the bur- dence as late as 1728, although Provi- ied rubbish heaps left by Indians at their dence, curiously, had large deposits of ancient camps. It was a kitchen midden, natural limestone. Quite understandably for example, that was the “lyme Pitt” of the practice was frowned upon by the tanner Thomas Batt of Boston. Batt began town: mining there sometime before 1667, using Upon complaint made to this council1 his lime, for the most part, in tanning. The that the Long oyster bed that hath bin “lime liquors” opened up the fiber struc- the principal supply of oysters for the inhabitants and poore of our several ture of the hides so that hair and protein Neighboring Precincts now likely to be matter could be easily removed.’ In 1667 wholey destroyed by those that take and the Boston Town Records report, “There have took up the trade of Lime burning is lett out to Thomas Batt the lyme pitts, . if any person or persons shall be that he formerly rented, to make vse of taken and convicted of getting and gathering oysters and shells upon sd them 14 yrs., at 75 6d.“4 The “pitts” were oyster bed in order for the makeingof located on the western side of Beacon Hill. Lime: shall forfeit all such shells or Lime The town records give a clue to their that shall be so made . . . and procicuted location in 1668, mentioning “. . . on the as in Actions of Trespass in forty shillings.* Town land wherein are lyme pitts . . . on the aforesaid street leading to the Once the limestone or the shells had spring.“’ Only one other lime pit is been gathered the limeburner placed the mentioned in the early Boston records, a material in a “field kiln.” The kiln, in the small “LimeKill” run by the brickmaker shape of a “truncated cone inverted,” was Richard Gridley in the “Southerly part of packed with a “charge consisting of the town.‘16 Apparently Batt and Gridley limestone and fuel alternately stratified.” were the major suppliers of lime for The limestone or shell, soon glowing Boston. white from the heat, burned for eighteen These scattered middens were not suffi- hours or longer until it was completely cient to supply the lime needs of New calcined.9 Throughout the processsteady England. With the many uses of lime currents of air were forced through the creating a steady demand, settlers seized kiln to maintain the high temperatures opportunities to gather shells swept onto required for a “good marble,” as lime was beaches after storms. In 1694 one such then called. storm swept quantities of shellfish onto Nathaniel Hawthorne pictured the the beaches of Lynn, producing a lime crude kilns and the men who tended them hysteria in the town. Hoping to reduce the in the short story Erhan Brand. The general chaos of the situation the Lynn “insufferable glare,” the “curling and magistrates voted that townsmen could riotous flames,” and the “athletic and coal “dig and gather as many as they wished begrimed figure of the limeburner” of for their own use, but no more.“’ A Hawthorne’s nineteenth century New penalty of twenty shillings awaited any England would not have been different who carted the shells out of the town to be two hundred years before.‘O burned into lime. Often a large masonry project required Such storms were infrequent bonanzas. supplies of lime beyond the production Impatient individuals often did not wait capacity of local limeburners. Lime-short for a beaching and pillaged live oyster Boston offers a good example of this beds. This practice occurred in Provi- problem in the construction of the Peter The A vailabilityoj ’ Lime and Masonry Construction 23

Sargeant House, completed in 1679. recording the arrival of lime shipments to Sargeant purchased the land for his future New England ports.r5 home, in later years known as the While Boston was short of lime for Province House, on July 30, 1677. On mortar, a few areas of New England September 25, 1677 the town records possessed ample natural deposits. These report that “liberty was granted to Mr. locations developed unique masonry tra- Peter Sargeant, to set up a limekiln upon ditions in the seventeenth and eighteenth Clay Hill near Fox Hill, if it be done with centuries. The gradual export of natural the advice and approbation of Deacon limestone from these areas influenced the Elliot.“rr development of masonry architecture in Sargeants’ wealth permitted such a lime-short locations, such as Boston. costly undertaking. The majority of was the first New Eng- Bostons’ citizens, however, could not land area to discover a natural deposit of dream of such a project. Although the limestone. In 1661 Robert Hackleton was 6 ‘ General Court had ordered on October 15, . . . to have liberty to burn lime upon the 1679 “. . . that henceforth no dwelling common meer about and to take stones house in Boston shalbe erected & sett up and wood for the same purpose.“r6 During except of stone or brick . . . ,” in response 1665 the town of Providence proclaimed L ‘ to the awful destruction of the sweeping . . those lime rocks around Hackletons’ fire of August 1679, the townsmen re- lime kiln shall perpetually be common fused to comply. The opposition to the and that no land shall be laid out on the masonry law, rooted in the high cost of north east or south east of said kiln.. . said compliance, was so intense that on May kiln being at or near a place called 19, 1680 the Court suspended “the ex- Soakequoisett.“r7 By 1669 there were two ecuting and prosecution of the late lawe limestone quarries in the vicinity of . . . for the space of three years.“‘* The Providence - Dexters’ Lime Rocks ten “three years” provision became meaning- miles north of Providence and the Man- less as Boston authorities never again ton deposit four miles west of Providence. attempted to enforce the law. While The Manton kiln stood until 1904 and was Boston was never without brick structures described in that year as “twelve feet deep - as early as 1652 there is mention of and ten feet in diameter,” a very large “Edw: Bendalls brick house”13 - mason- kiln.*‘ ry was the exception and remained rare The excitement of the Rhode Island until the turn of the eighteenth century. discovery prompted Roger Williams to The question of the importation of lime write Governor John Winthrop, Jr. of from outside of New England arises , who was visiting Boston. whenever early masonry is discussed. Williams wrote that he had &.‘ . encour- There is little evidence that lime was aged Mr. [Gregory] Dexter to send you a imported from outside the region for limestone, and to salute you with this building purposes. Some “minor quan- enclosed.” If there was “. . . any occasion tities” of imported lime and coral were of yourself (or others) to use any of this discovered at the Saugus Iron Works stone . . . ,” Williams wrote, a shipment archeological explorationI and English was possible for “. . . Mr. Dexter hath lusty vessels are known to have delivered lime teams and lusty sons, and a very willing to the West Indies. However, no seven- heart.“r9 teenth century document has been found It is unknown whether Rhode Island Old- Time New England lime reached Boston or anywhere else in calcined shells would have been present.* ’ New England during the years imme- The use of natural limestone for mortar diately following the discovery. Within was more economical than production of Rhode Island the limestone deposits shell lime, for the limestone deposits were played an important role in the develop- less expensive to mine than shells. The ment of a regional masonry style. Early most humble of stone-end dwellings, such Rhode Island masonry depended initially as the Clement Weaver House, c. 1680, in on the abundant shell supplies along East Greenwich, and the Richard Searle Narragansett Bay. Up and down the House, c. 1677, in Oaklawn, used lime shores of the bay the first settlers con- burned from limestone, even though the structed dwellings of rubble stone and Clement Weaver House stands less than a shell lime mortar. Many of these struc- mile from shell-strewn Narragansett Bay. tures, including the demolished “Stone The availability of natural limestone fos- Castle” of the Greene Family, c. 1640, in tered the early stone masonry tradition of Potowomut and the Samuel Cranston Rhode Island. Without the lime deposits, House, c. 1640, in Newport, were built Rhode Island vernacular dwellings would entirely of stone.*O Sometime during this have been quite different. early settlement period the stone-ender When limestone deposits were dis- dwelling emerged as the dominant style. covered in Newbury, in This form combined a timber frame 1697, the Rhode Island experience was structure with an end wall made of stone. repeated. The availability of lime in New- Even with the discovery of natural lime- bury influenced local building. Samuel stone in 1661 stone-enders constructed Sewall dutifully reported the “. . . account near the bay often used shell lime. One of the body of Lime-Stone discoverd’ at example of a shell lime stone-end is the Newbury. . .” in his Diary, declaring it to Bliss House, c. 1680, in Newport. The be “good marble.” According to Sewall, availability of natural lime at Providence, the discovery had produced great excite- however, permitted the stone-end form to ment in Newbury, so that soon men I‘ flourish in growing areas distant from . . . began to come with Teams by 30 in a shell supplies. day . . .” to carry off the limestone to An examination and chemical analysis kilns.** After the discovery brick end of mortar samples from eight remaining houses like the Short House, c. 1732, stone-end houses in Rhode Island and appeared in and about Newbury. For southeastern Massachusetts provides many years, lime burned from Newbury conclusive evidence that natural lime- limestone was used in mortars throughout stone was used in the mortars, with the eastern Massachusetts. The Newbury his- single exception of the Bliss House. There torian Joshua Coffin remarked that I.‘ . . are shell fragments in the mortars of all vast quantities of lime of the best quality stone-enders, and this evidence has led to were annually made in Newbury for a belief that all Rhode Island masonry nearly a century for export as well as used shell lime. However the shell frag- home use.“23 ments in the mortar are not, in fact, After the Newbury discovery lime mor- calcined and were added to the aggregate tar was readily available in Boston. This much as broken glass was added to new supply eliminated the need for the eighteenth century mortars. If shell lime smelly shell lime kilns along the Charles,24 had been used, fragments of partially with cleaner air and cheaper masonry The A vailabilityoj ’ Lime and Masonry Construction 25

construction as a result. When in 1733 the England passed from a region short in Newbury lime was augmented by lime lime to an area with adequate supplies. produced by William Maclntyre, “the Where abundant lime supplies existed, as father of limeburners” in Thomaston, in Rhode Island and Newbury, early and shipped to Boston on the two masonry traditions thrived. Masonry lime sloops of Samuel Waldo, the era of building patterns expanded throughout lime shortage was over. Now Boston the region after the discovery of limestone architecture made the final transforma- sources. Only with the transport of lime to tion from wood to masonry; Boston, from Boston and other lime-poor sections could this time forward, was a city of red brick.2S masonry become an important part of the In the course of one century New entire regions’ architectural tradition.

NOTES

r Rain was a problem when mud mortars were lo Nathaniel Hawthorne, Hawthorne’sShort Sto- used. John Winthrop, for example, constructed ries,ed. Newton Arvin (New York: Alfred A. a “building of stone at Mistick” that “f . . . not Knopf, 19751, pp. 375-390. being finished, and laid with clay for want of I‘ BostonTown Records,1660-1701, p. 113 and lime) two sides were washed down to the Suffolk County Deeds, X, p. 144. ground Journal,“History of New England.” . . .” I2 Nathaniel B. Shurtleff, ed. Recordsof the ed. James Kendall Hasmer (New York: Charles Governorand Companyof ’ the MassachusettsBay Scribners’ Sons, 1908), pp. 69-70. in New Englandt/628-86), 5 vols. (Boston: W. 2 Roger Lee Grindle, Quarryand Kiln: TheStory White, 1853-54), V, p. 240. See Abbott L. of Maine Limestone(Rockland. Me.: Courier- Cummings, “The Domestic Architecture of Gazette, 1971). p. 20. Boston, 1660-1725,” Archivesof AmericanArr 3 Fred OFlaherty,’ ed., The Chemistry and QuarterlyJournal. vol. 9, no. 4, 1971, pp. l-16. Technologyof Leather (New York: Reinhold r3 Ibid.. V, pp. 266-267; Suffolk County Deeds, Publishing, nd.), p. 229. Lime had many uses in I, p. 117. the seventeenth century. Besides tanning and I4 Neal E. Hartley, Ironworkson the Sougus its use in mortar, it was necessary in sugar (Norman, Okla.: Univ. of Oklahoma Press, making, soap boiling, and sanitation. 1957), p. 169. 4 A Report of the RecordCommissioners of the City of Boston,Boston Town Records 1660-1701 I5 See Higgins, p. 21 I. (Boston: Rockwell and Churchill, 1881). p. 35. r6 Providence Records, III, p. 8. 5 Suffolk County (Massachusetts) Deeds, V, p. r7 Providence Records, III, p. 66. 494. See also Suffolk County Deeds, V, p. 495; I8 D. H. Harris, “Nautaconkanut Evening,” XIII, p. 387; BostonTown Records,1660-1701, ProvidenceJournal, April 3, 1904, p. 24. For a p. 1. discussion of the location of Rhode Island 6 Suffolk County Deeds, VIII. p. 352. Also see limestone deposits see Sidney S. Rider, The BostonTown Records, 166GI 701,p. I. Lands of Rhode Island as they wereknown to Cononciusand Miantunnomiwhen Roger Williams ’ ’ Alonzo Lewis, Historyof Lynn (Boston: Sam- camein 1636 (Providence, n.d.), p. 270. uel Dickenson, 1844), pp. 185-186. s The Early Recordsof the Town of Providence t9 Williams to Winthrop, August 19, 1669, (Providence: Remington, 1897). X11, p. 89. Publicationsof the NarragansettClub (Provi- dence: 1874), VI, p. 332. 9 Bryan Higgins, Experimentsand Observations of . . . Cementsand Quick Limes (London: T. Cadell. 2o Little is known of these houses. See Oliver 17801, p. 280. Payson Fuller, The Historyof Warwick(Provi- 26 Old- Time New England dence: Angell, Burlingame & Co., 18751, p. 76 For a comparative discussion of stone-end for a drawing of the “Stone Castle.” structures and mortar see Norman M. Isham 2t The examination and chemical analysis of and Albert F. Brown, Early Rhode Island Houses the mortar samples was conducted by the (Providence: Preston and Rounds, 18951, esp. writer with the generous assistance of Mr. pp. 73-75. lsham and Brown also offer a Morgan Phillips S.P.N.E.A. and Dr. Malcolm comprehensive list of Rhode Island dwellings Gauri of the University of Louisville, Louisville, pp. 90-97. Ky. Houses tested: The Eleazer Arnold House, 22 Samuel Sewall, Diary oj ’ Samuel Sewall, ed. c. 1687; Bliss House, c. 1680; Clemence-Irons Mark Van Doren (New York: Macy-Masius, House, c. 1680; Thomas Fenner House, c. 1927), p. 144. 1677; Greene-Bowen House, c. 1715; Richard 23 Joshua Coffin, An Historical Sketch of New- Searle House, c. 1680; Waite-Potter House, c. bury, Newburyport, and West Newbury (Boston: 1677: Clement Weaver House. c. 1676. Numer- Samuel G. Drake. 1845). o. 165. For a discus- ous other masonry dwellingswere’ examined, sion of the location of the Newbury lime quarry but due to extensive repointing of exposed see‘ John J. Currier, Ould Newbury (Boston: masonry they could not be included in this Damrell and Upham, 18961, p. 95. study. Laboratory tests, with controls, were 24 After 1697 references to lime burning in conducted on limestone and shells by the writer Boston are rare. See Boston Town Records, to recreate limeburning methods of the seven- 1701-1715. p. 17 and p. 92. teenth century. 25 Grindle, p. 2.