Architecture published a photograph of the mansion by Wurts Bros. shortly after its completion -- (copyright expired) |
The brownstone mansion
of wealthy widow Helen M. Knickerbocker was architecturally out of fashion in
1897. Sitting at the corner of Fifth
Avenue and 64th Street, it had been designed by brothers David and
John Jardine in 1872. The French Second Empire home was now a relic of the post Civil War years. A newspaper would recall that “Mr. [Henry] Knickerbocker
purchased the corner and adjoining property in 1868 when the boom in property
incident to the laying out of Central Park was on.”
But now Mrs.
Knickerbocker’s neighborhood was filling with marble and limestone palaces as the
older brownstones were razed in favor of fashion.
A decade earlier, in April 1887, California
railroad tycoon Charles Crocker had purchased the Hutchinson mansion on 58th
Street, next door to Cornelius Vanderbilt III’s block-engulfing chateau, for
his newly-wed daughter Hattie and her husband Charles Beatty Alexander. Crocker was less optimistic about the
prospects of his youngest son, George, who had a reputation of “being a
reckless young man,” according to The New York Times years later.
Charles Crocker’s will,
therefore, stipulated that before George would not inherit a dime unless “for the space of
five years continuously he shall abstain from the use of spirituous, vinous, or
malt liquors, to the extent that he shall not during this period have been intoxicated.” George complied. In 1894, six years after his father’s death,
he inherited $6 million of his father’s $30 million estate.
The 1904 book Prominent
and Progressive Americans would say of him, “His father’s wealth made it
unnecessary for him to engage in any struggle for a livelihood.” Nevertheless, George assumed his role in the
family railroad business.
The handsome George Crocker in 1904 -- Prominent and Progressive Americans (copyright expired) |
George Crocker had been
an intimate friend of California mine owner Alexander Rutherford who died on
March 16, 1893. A year later, on June 5,
1894 he married Rutherford’s widow, Emma Hanchett Rutherford, in a fashionable
Fifth Avenue ceremony in St. Thomas Church.
The San Francisco Call said “She is a beautiful woman, who has
entertained well and intensively at her residence on Bush street, but since her
husband’s death she has resided in New York City.” Along with his bride came her three children,
Alexander, Emma and Alice.
Now, three years later,
George, would set his sights on Helen Knickerbocker’s house.
On September 29, 1897
The New York Times reported that Mrs. Knickerbocker had sold her “four-story
brownstone-fronted dwelling” to George Crocker, “the California millionaire.” It was the end of the line for the staid old
home. “It is said to be Mr. Crocker’s
intention to demolish the present house and erect a residence for his own
occupancy,” said the newspaper.
George Crocker gave to
the architectural firm of Bright & Bacon the
task of replacing the Henry Knickerbocker house with an up-to-date mansion .
Plans were filed on January 27, 1898 and the San Francisco Call reported
that “it will be five stories in height” and estimated the cost at $100,000—nearly
$3 million today.
The completed house at
No. 1 East 64th Street would reflect the couple’s wealth and social
position. The Beaux-Arts mansion
featured graceful French ironwork at the second story, a deep balcony accessed
by French doors within a dramatic arch above the entrance, and an ornate
mansard with oriels, dormers, stone urns and a decorative balustrade. As expected in the late 1890s, the mansion
was designed with period rooms, filled with appropriate antiques, tapestries
and artworks.
“The reception room,”
said The New York Times, “whose walls are covered with gold brocade, has
furniture of the Louis XIV and Louis XV periods, sofas, chairs, and tables and
a feature of the room is a large Louis XV desk of mahogany, with ornamentation
in chiseled and gilt ormolu in designs of cupids and mythological
subjects. There is a little statuette of
Louis XIV in wood and ivory in this room, vases of Sevres and Chinese
porcelain, and the floor is covered with handsome rugs.”
The reception room
fronted Fifth Avenue, separated from the dining room by a spacious staircase
hall. The Times made note of the
antiques in the entrance hall. “The
special feature of the hall is an old Italian carved marble font, with a
triangular base, which stands just below the stairs, and a pair of Chinese
palace jars of the Ch’ien Lung period.”
Red velvet ropes led up
the marble staircases “held in place by dolphin supports,” reported the newspaper. The ropes matched the red carpeting of the hall. The first floor drawing room
was furnished in Louis XV and Louix XVI antiques.
“The drawing room suite
is after one in the Palace of Fontainebleu, upholstered in fine Aubusson
tapestry, with scenes from the fables of La Fontaine,” said The Times. “There are vitrines, console tables, a great
pair of bronze and gilt torches, Neptune and Aphrodite, each a seated bronze
figure and forming the andirons, and Persian rugs on the floor. A Corot is among the pictures in this room.”
photograph from the Catalogue of Costly Furnishings Contained in the Residence of the Late George Crocker, 1912 (copyright expired) |
In Crocker’s masculine
oak-paneled library hung a Gainsborough, a Sir Thomas Lawrence, and several paintings
by Van Loo and Cesare Detti. The walls
of the “Pink Boudoir” on the second were covered with rose pink damask and the
room was furnished with French antiques.
“There is more furniture of French design in a boudoir adjoining this
room, and the furniture is in the same period in the white and gold bedroom on
the same floor, with the walls covered in a deep, rich red brocade.”
Below street level was
the smoking room with heavy oak and walnut furniture upholstered in dark red.
Emma Hanchett Rutherford Crocker photograph The San Francisco Call July 20, 1904 (copyright expired) |
Emma Crocker’s entertainments
in the new mansion started immediately. On
January 24, 1900 The New York Times noted that “Mrs. George Crocker gave
yesterday at her residence…a luncheon of fifteen covers.” White lilacs in a tall silver vase served as
the centerpiece and green and white orchids adorned a side table. To entertain her guests the newspaper said “A
band of colored minstrels played banjo and other music during the luncheon.”
photograph from the Catalogue of Costly Furnishings Contained in the Residence of the Late George Crocker, 1912 (copyright expired) |
On March 7 of that year
Emma gave a “tea, with music” as reported in the New-York Tribune “in honor of
her daughters, the Misses Rutherford.”
The lavish mansion was
threatened on April 27, 1901. The Geneva
Daily Times of Geneva, New York reported “The big white palace of millionaire
George Crocker, at Fifth avenue and 64th street, with its contents
of priceless art treasures, narrowly escaped being destroyed by fire this
morning.”
The fire had started in
a gas radiator on the second floor. “It
spread to the oiled floor, and a number of costly Turkish rugs and fine
tapestry hangings were burned,” said the newspaper. A bucket brigade composed of servants helped
extinguish the blaze; however the expensive furnishings were heavily water
damaged.
Entertainments for
daughter Emma’s introduction into society were expectedly extravagant. On January 9, 1902 the Crockers gave a “very
pretty dinner and dance,” according to the San Francisco Call. Emma Crocker decorated the house with potted
orange trees and following dinner was a cotillion. The guest list that evening included the most
prominent of Manhattan society. Among
them were Mrs. Stuyvesant Fish, Mr. and Mrs. Oliver H. P. Belmont, Mrs. Herman
Oelrichs, and Mr. and Mrs. Pembroke Jones.
The Crockers summered at
their Newport cottage, Shields Villa; built a mansion at Darlington, New Jersey
deemed by the San Franciso Call to be “of palatial proportions;” and as was
appropriate for the family of railroad tycoon, traveled about in their luxurious
private railway car, the Emalita. In
1903, however, the glittering life of the Crocker family was about to change.
Alice was engaged to J.
J. Langdon Erving and excitement for a sumptuous social season was high. As the winter season began, Emma gave a
musicale during which opera star Lillian Nordica sang. Unknown at the time, it would be the last entertainment
Emma Crocker would give. She had been
diagnosed with cancer.
In February 1904 the
48-year old socialite sailed to France where, according to The New York Times,
an operation was performed. She returned
home, but by June “her condition became so serious that anxiety as to the
outcome of her sickness was felt.”
Despite her critical
condition, Emma made the annual pilgrimage to Newport in July, traveling by
boat “to avoid changes and to make the journey as easy as possible.” Constantly attended by nurses and physicians,
her condition worsened until July 25 when she slipped into unconsciousness.
Emma’s bedroom in the
Newport cottage filled with family—George and the three children, J. J. Erving,
and Emma’s sister and brother-in-law. On
July 26, 1904 she died without regaining consciousness.
In reporting her death
The New York Times noted that soon after marrying George Crocker she “began a
brilliant social career. She had a
cottage at Newport and a town house and entertained lavishly, the affairs at
the Crocker house generally taking the form of musicals and large dinners. She moved in the same set with Mrs. Herman
Oelrichs and Mrs. O. H. P. Belmont.”
Alice’s Newport wedding “which
would have been the leading social event of the season,” according to The Times,
was postponed “and all arrangements for the future movements of Mr. Erving and
Miss Rutherford will be held in abeyance.” The newspaper also expected that Mrs. Herman
Oelrichs would recall the invitations to all her social entertainments.
In his grief, George
struck out at the attending physician, Dr. Doyen, suing him for $20,000 “on the
ground that ‘veritable moral violence’ had been used to convince him that she
could be cured,” said the San Francisco Call.
George Crocker
immediately turned his philanthropic focus to the study, prevention and cure of
cancer. He donated $50,000 to Columbia College “to encourage a study of the disease.”
His near-obsession with his new-found cause would end in a bitter family
battle a few years later.
Ironically, within a few
years of Emma’s death George was diagnosed with cancer. He underwent two operations. But the condition deteriorated and at 5:15 on the
afternoon of December 4, 1909 the 54-year old multi-millionaire died in the
Fifth Avenue mansion.
Four days later The New
York Times reported that Columbia College was to receive about $1.5 million to
be known as the “George Crocker Special Research Fund.” The income from the fund would be used for
cancer research. Crocker’s will
instructed that the money for the fund come from the sale of the Fifth Avenue
mansion.
photograph from the Catalogue of Costly Furnishings Contained in the Residence of the Late George Crocker, 1912 (copyright expired) |
At the time, the
newspaper noted that Crocker left $25,000 to “his valet, Lee, and smaller
bequests to other servants in his town house and country estate, measured by
the length of their employment.”
Trouble, however, was on
the horizon. The mansion at No. 1 East
64th Street was in Emma’s name at the time of her death. Her will stipulated that it was to pass to
George “for life, with the provision that it was to go to her children at his
death.” George’s estate, therefore,
would be legally unable to sell the property.
Emma’s three children
declared that up to the time of their mother’s death George had “exhibited
loving and tender consideration toward them.”
Little by little, however, George began conniving how to wrest the Fifth
Avenue property from them. In December 1904
he promised to will each of them $300,000 in exchange for their interests in the
property. On January 13, 1905 the
transfer of title was made.
When George Crocker’s
will was read, the Rutherford children were shocked and wounded. Crocker had bequeathed $25,000 to his Chinese
servant, Lee Hung Yung, and $100,000 to Mrs. Charles A. Childs (who “often
visited him at his country seat,” according to The Times); to his brother and
sister, Willliam and Hattie, he left $3 million each. The Rutherford children, Alexander, Emma and
Alice were bequeathed $100 apiece of $12 million estate. There was no mention of the $300,000 due each
for their shares of the mansion.
The Rutherford children
sued to negate the deed they had made under “false representations” and charged
that Crocker had misused their trust to further his “fraudulent and wicked
ends.” The suit contended that the terms
of the deed were “totally destroyed upon the death of George Crocker by the
provision of his will.”
When they lost their court
battle, each refused the $100 willed to them.
On January 4 through 6,
1912, everything in the house was sold at auction. Along with the costly antiques, artwork and
furnishings, were the contents of Crocker’s wine cellar--valued at $11,593.
The mansion, itself, was
sold to James B. Haggin.
He had made his millions in copper; and was well known in the horse
racing circles. On July 20, 1912 the
first hint at health problems came when he was taken to the Good Samaritan
Hospital in Lexington, Kentucky, where he had gone “in the interest of the
tobacco pool.”
Like the Crockers, the
Haggins entertained lavishly in their new home.
On June 8, 1913 The Sun said “Mrs. James B. Haggin gave an informal
dance on Tuesday night at her new home, 1 East Sixty-fourth street, and in
spite of the warm night it was a most enjoyable dance. Mr. and Mrs. Haggin will soon go to Newport,
where they have again leased Arleigh, the Pratt village in Bellevue avenue.”
A year later a special
report to The New York Times from Newport on August 16, 1914 said that “James B
Haggin, the capitalist and sportsman, who has been very ill at his cottage
here, showed improvement this afternoon over his condition of last night.” Two doctors had been in attendance for 48
hours and said Haggin was “resting more comfortably.”
As if preparing his
obituary, The Times noted “Mr. Haggin is largely interested in mines in California,
Montana, and Nevada and has several large stock farms in Kentucky, among which
is the largest stud of racing and trotting horses in this country. He is a member of the Union, Tuxedo, Riding,
Turf and Field, and the Metropolitan Clubs of New York.”
A month later, James B.
Haggin was dead. He left an estate of
just over $24 million. Margaret V.
Haggin used $500,000 of that amount to pay off the mortgage on No. 1 East 64th
Street still owed to Columbia.
The mansion, along with
the William Guggenheim house at No. 833 Fifth Avenue and the Frank Jay Gould
mansion at No. 834 Fifth Avenue, would be demolished in 1930 to make way for
the gargantuan apartment building designed by Rosario Candela. Candela’s 16-story building survives today.
photo http://www.cityrealty.com/graphics/photos/f/fif834.01b.photo.jpg |
many thanks to reader Dennis Beeghly for suggesting this post
I believe that Mrs. Herman Oelrichs (pronounced, I am told, "Ulricks") was the daughter of Comstock Lode Millionaire, Jmaes G. Fair. her younger sister, Virginia, was the first wife of W.K. Vanderbilt, Jr.
ReplyDeleteThere is a deorating note here that you often see in similar houses of this vintage: A desk or large rectangular table placed in the center of a room, with two single chairs facing outward, placed at angles at the corners of the table, with other chairs scattered around. None of it seems arranged for easy conversation.
I remember reading that 834 Fifth Avenue was designed before Mrs. Ali decided to sell her house, and the origional plan for the building was substantially different. It was quickly redrawn when the builders reached an agreement with Mrs. Ali and obtained the coveted corner property. I believe that part of consideration for the sale was an apartment at 834 for Mrs. Ali
the original design for 834 called for a midblock 120 foot wide structure with mostly full floor apartments, some half floors and a few duplexes on the first floor floors, and also on the setback floors.When she sold the apartment house was so advanced(they were bricking the first 2-3 floors,and all the steelwork was in place) that Candela couldn't do major changes,and since we are talking about 1930, with the Depression and all, he couldnt afford it either.So he added a new wing,or line , whoch consisted of stacked duplexes,each with 60 foot frontage.He also "took" one or two rooms from the backs of the adjoining larger units(ones with much bigger frontage) in the original design..
DeleteShe then lived there for many many years.
And yes part of the consideration was an apartment in the building, quite a common practice back then.Mansion/townhouse owners wanted to stay not only in the same neighbbourhood, they wanted to stay in the same place,(address) and the developers offered them all sorts of deals to convince them to sell their "outdated" houses.
You have to remember back in the 20s individual townhouses and mansions were considered obsolete,inadequate,expensive to maintain...if it wasnt for the Depression we would have much fewer historic houses in NY..especially considering the crazy rate of construction in the 20s...in another 5-10 years they would have been all demolished..
Too bad she sold. Considering the slender lot left over after the Candela apartment was built, the structure would probably have survived the years as a small townhouse conversion or slipped into institutional use. Nice movement and undulation occurring on the stone facade.
ReplyDeleteglad to see interior shots. the floorplan is probably predictable but the interiors, i always wanted to see
ReplyDeleteThe house was exquisite.
ReplyDeleteGeorge Crocker was a stinker in life........and beyond!
***