City August 21, 2010 8:45 AM

History of the Hydraulics: Part Four, Larkin's Demise

History of the Hydraulics: Part Four, Larkin’s Demise

During the end of the nineteenth-century and into the twentieth-century, the Hydraulics neighborhood was a thriving, self-sufficient community within the larger City of Buffalo.  The area had a unique identity and culture and offered all available public, religious and community services to its residents.  Although the neighborhood had lost its namesake, the Hydraulic Canal, the community continued to have a strong self-sufficient identity within the larger city of Buffalo.  The Larkin Company, manufacturer of soaps and toiletries, was certainly the most notable business which originated in the Hydraulics neighborhood.

The Decline of the Larkin Company and the Demolition of the Administration Building

The Larkin Company was once one of the largest and most recognizable companies in the country.  Soon after the company reached its largest and most influential phase in the 1920s, the company began suffering from both internal and external pressures.  Many of the issues and obstacles faced by Buffalo, and specifically the Hydraulics neighborhood, in the mid-twentieth-century also led to the demise of the Larkin Company empire by the 1950s.

During the late 1920s and early 1930s, Buffalo's position as the most vital Great Lakes port and railroad city began to weaken.  This was due in part to the increasing number of cross-country highways being constructed in the period and the rise of the trucking industry.  Also, the creation of new shipping lanes including the Welland Canal through Ontario, Canada (significantly expanded between 1912 and 1932) also helped traffic circumvent the Buffalo and Niagara Falls area.  Both of these conditions helped to undermine Buffalo's historic geographical advantage at the confluence of the Great Lakes and the East Coast.

larkinfactories.pngConsumer culture also began to change during the interwar period as well.  The popularity of mail-order catalog business, which had been the backbone of the Larkin Company's sales strategy from its inception in the 1870s, began to wane as chain stores proliferated across the nation's small towns, allowing the consumer to view, sample and directly purchase their goods.  The increasing popularity of the automobile allowed for greater mobility of small town residents, who could come into the urban centers to visit stores which offered cut-price items with which the fixed-price Larkin products could not compete.  In addition to these factors, women, who had been the primary Larkin sales force through the turn of the century, now had increasing opportunities in business and industry after World War I and were no longer drawn by the additional meager incomes which the Larkin "Clubs of Ten" could bring.

The Larkin Company attempted to change with the times and stay afloat in the changing business climate of the post-war era.  The first of over several hundred "Larkin Economy Stores" opened in 1918 as a means to compete with the chain stores.  The company itself reorganized, selling off subsidiary manufacturers and closing some of the branch offices in the 1920s.

In additional to these external pressures, internal problems also became more serious in this period.  John D. Larkin regarded the company as a family-run operation, to be continued by his sons and sons-in-law.  Larkin's oldest son, Charles joined the company in the 1890s, but he lacked a passion for his father's company and retired in 1920.  Other family members were made executives in the early 1900s, including John D. Larkin, Jr., who in 1915 began taking an active role in company policy making, setting the stage for his eventual takeover in 1926. William Heath, Larkin Office Manager since 1902, abruptly retired from the Larkin Company in 1924, and Darwin Martin soon followed, retiring in 1925 after butting heads with John D. Larkin, Jr.  The loss of these critical members of the Larkin Company core led to a wave of other sudden retirements, including three key members of the Secretary's Department.  The increasing prominence of John D. Larkin, Jr. in the Larkin Company brought about the retirement of most of the men who had built the company in its earliest mail-order days.  Following the death of Larkin Sr. in 1926, his son John D. Larkin, Jr. controlled the fate of the struggling company.

Mirroring his disregard for the loyal and experienced executive core of the Larkin Company, Larkin, Jr. had little regard for the stately architecture of his father's Administration Building.  Despite the on-site protests of Frank Lloyd Wright, the younger John Larkin authorized the cutting of large windows into the fifth story of the building.  The Larkin Auditorium building, which had played a role entertaining the throngs of Larkin Company employees for many years, was demolished in the 1936 to make way for a parking lot.  He relocated the mail-order business from the symbolic place of honor on the main floor of the light court to the fifth floor, dryly renaming it the "Buying Department."  Various other departments were relocated and rearranged in the various factory buildings, often with detrimental effects on workflow and productivity.

adminrear.pngDuring John D. Larkin, Jr.'s tenure as President of the Larkin Company, between 1926 and 1940, the company struggled with increasing indebtedness.  The younger Larkin continued to push for maintaining the large, diverse premium catalog despite the changing marketplace and in the face of new competition.  During this period the Larkin Company faced shrinking sales revenues and the increased strain of the Great Depression.  By 1939 the situation was so dire that the company's Board of Directors was forced to take action to avoid bankruptcy.  As part of a restructuring deal, the board separated the Larkin Co. Inc. (the company's official name at the time) from the company's real estate holdings, selling off properties whenever possible in order to help pay off the debt.  In the same year Harry Larkin replaced John D. Larkin, Jr. as president, and Larkin, Jr. soon resigned from the Board of Directors as well.  This same year saw the sale of the Larkin Administration Building to the Larkin Co. Inc., which moved the Larkin department store into the first three floors of the building.  The much smaller mail-order department was housed in the fourth and fifth floors.  These moves taken by the Larkin Company were unsuccessful in preventing the collapse of the company, however, and in 1941 additional corporations were created in order to allow stock-holders to salvage portions of the business.  By 1943, a creditor's committee was formed, most of the company's assets were liquidated, and the creditors were all paid off.  As a result, the Larkin Company was left with no assets other than the Administration Building, on which they owed $85,000 in back taxes.

Larkin_light_court.jpgThe Larkin Company and the Administration Building was purchased in 1943 by a contractor from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, under the belief that the taxes owed would help offset large profits he was realizing from laying a transcontinental pipeline.  When the Federal Government denied the tax break, he abandoned the building, which stood unheated and unmaintained.  In 1945 the City of Buffalo took over the Administration Building in a $104,616 tax foreclosure proceeding.  The specificity of the design of the Administration Building with its central court and open plan, coupled with the fact it had no in-house heating facility, made its reuse difficult.  The building's location in the Hydraulics neighborhood, removed from the downtown core, was also seen as an impediment to reuse.  In 1946 an offer of $26,000 for the decaying building was made by an anonymous buyer, but the Common Council sought a national advertising campaign as a way to increase the attention on the sale of the building.  This plan never materialized, however, once a potential housing project for the building was studied and ultimately deemed unfeasible. 

 

Further attempts to stimulate a high selling price for the Administration Building failed, and it continued to decompose.  According to accounts, everything from lighting fixtures, knobs, plumbing and even the copper roofs had been stripped from the building.  The iron fencing of the low brick wall which surrounded the building was removed for a wartime scrap collection.

The last attempt to reuse and save the festering Administration Building was made by councilman Joseph F. Dudzick on April 18th, 1949.  Dudzick cried out against the treatment of such a world-renowned building, and announced plans to include the building in the program for city improvements.  Ultimately, Dudzick's attempts to save the building also failed.  On August 20, 1949 the Western Trading Corporation offered the Common Council $5,000 to demolish the Larkin Administration Building and replace it with new developments which were claimed to provide the city with more tax income.  While the sale of the building was met with some public outcry, the sale and impending demolition of the building was seen as a relief to some area residents.

Demolition of the building began in February of 1950, undertaken by the firm of Morris & Reimann.  Due to the complex nature of the building's construction, the Administration Building was taken apart almost by hand.  In May 1951 the Western Trading Corporation had plans to build a trucking terminal on the site, but by November they proposed to the Common Council relocating their facility.  Their relocation was approved, thus the Larkin Administration Building was demolished to make way for what amounted to a paved parking lot.

Frank Lloyd Wright, upon hearing of the demolition of one of his earliest and most significant buildings, reportedly stated that the building had "served its purpose and deserved a decent burial."  He had been aware of the disfiguring alterations which the building had suffered under John D. Larkin, Jr. as well as its final decay in the 1940s.  In his autobiography he commented, "They [the Larkins] never realized the place their building took in the thought of the world - for they never hesitated to make senseless changes in it in after years."  Today, all that remains of the once-glorious triumph of modern office design is a portion of the brick and sandstone wall which surrounded the site, located near the Swan Street subway.

senecalarkin.pngThe creation of the Larkin Administration Building and its ultimate demise and demolition in many ways mirrored the situation of the Hydraulics neighborhood as a whole.  The building's construction at the dawn of the twentieth-century was an era of great prosperity and success in the thriving industrial and commercial neighborhood.  The Larkin Company itself had been a product of all the features which had given rise and made the Hydraulics area a successful place to do business including its proximity to the nationwide network of rail lines, access to raw materials and the availability of a vast immigrant labor pool.  Ultimately, the decay and demolition of the landmark building paralleled the downturn the Hydraulics neighborhood took in the mid-twentieth century, facing population and business loss and the demolition of much of the urban architectural fabric of the neighborhood.  Much of the original architectural fabric of the Hydraulics neighborhood has been either altered beyond recognition or demolished all together.  Those rare buildings which do remain intact are remnants of the past history of the Hydraulics and survive to tell the neighborhood's story.  Today, both the glorious Larkin Administration Building and the thriving Hydraulics neighborhood are faded memories, relayed solely by the few remaining buildings which bear evidence of the past.

Source: National Register Multiple Property Documentation Form prepared by Architectural Historian Jennifer Walkowski of Clinton Brown Company Architecture.


Previous:

Part One: MPDF Document Assists Hydraulics Rdevelopment Efforts

Part Two: Origins of the Hydraulics District

Part Three: Rise of Larkin

Next: What Remains

Photos from the Daniel Larkin Collection at the Buffalo & Erie County Historical Society.jpgAbove photo from the Daniel Larkin Collection at the Buffalo & Erie County Historical Society

 

View image

Comments

Leave a comment

Excellent, excellent article.

Score: 2 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

thank you for this article, very well done.

Score: 2 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Thank Jennifer Walkowski, an Architectural Historian with Clinton Brown Company Architecture, who authored the MPDF for the neighborhood. This series is lifted directly from that document.

Score: 3 ( 3 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

This is a fantastic monograph on an important subject. Thanks to all who brought this to BRO. (Any chance of you taking over the BECHS website to make local history more accessible to the public?)

replied to WCPerspective
Score: 1 ( 3 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

This is good stuff. thanks to all involved for sharing. My family history in America began in this area. it's pretty cool getting context on the area.

Score: 1 ( 3 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Just look at that building and its magnificent. Yet this is not an expensive building.

It does not have expensive customer terra cotta like the Hotel Buffalo Art Nuveau or expensive cast iron facade like the German American Insurance Building Empire Style or expensive custom rough hewn stone like the Erie County Savings Richardsonian Chateau.

The Larkin Building is brick, cemembt and aggregate. Modern materials readily available today and rather inexpensive by comparison to other historic materials.

There are so many wonderful things happening in the Larkin District that it just seems incomplete to have so many FLW reconstruction and restoration projects to leave the Larkin Administration ignored.

Personally...I love the thought of putting the Buffalo Niagara Chamber of Commerce in it. Can anyone think of a better building to market our region nationally and internationally?

The other great loss for the Larkin District was St Patricks but with the surplus of churchs we shall not see that building come back.

Of course the other reasons for the demise of the Larkin District were beyond the loss of the canal but also the loss of the beltway, the loss of the trolleys that ran along Seneca, Broadway, Genessee.

Score: 1 ( 5 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

At the very least, I would like to see the brick and wrought iron fencing that surrounded the Larkin Administration Building reconstructed, the site preserved.

Just because the Larkin Administration Building will not be reconstructed today does not mean that we should abandon all reference to it for the future.

Score: 1 ( 5 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Interesting outlook from FLW.
"Frank Lloyd Wright, upon hearing of the demolition of one of his earliest and most significant buildings, reportedly stated that the building had "served its purpose and deserved a decent burial." "

I join the compliments to WCP for this series.

Score: 2 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

well, what would you expect...for FLW to nurse each building as an artist nurses their paintings or scupltures? FLW was not an emotional or sentimental person. He was selfish, egotistical, adulterer, even cruel and often over-spent on his buildings and borrowed to maintain his personal lifestyle.

FLW had a masterpiece in Tokyo that survived the earthquake. It was also demolished and FLW said practically nothing, though the Japanese recognized his genius and relocated and reconstructed all but the hotel room portions of the building.

FLW would have probably said the same about Graycliff, the Boathouse, the Martin Complex, Bluesky, Tiedol Gas Station or his other local projects but it doesnt negate any of the reasons why the Larkin Administration Building is of significant value to the Larkin District and to Buffalo.

replied to whatever
Score: 0 ( 4 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Thats a solid argument against "self serving historic preservation": when a the original tenant of a building goes bust, throw the building in the dump. Inefficient and expensive? Yes but FLW would have wanted it that way so is the will of the lord.

I can see you being a big FLW fan. He dreamed of "cities" where open space was extinct, everybody lived on at least an acre of land, and depended on their cars for survival.

No room for "self serving preservationists", unions and other lefties in Broadacre City. They are to be confined in LeCorbusier's towers along with minorities, single moms, "buy local" types, and other undesirables.

replied to whatever
Score: -1 ( 3 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Actually its not so much a fan of FLW but a follower of excellence.

I support modern/contemporary like Calatrava or IM Pei but I also support the greats in architecture FLW, Richardson, EB Green, Wicks, Sullivan, etc and the greats in building which weave our community together.

For me...I dont care what period or style...as long as it is representative of our city or representative of excellence.

replied to Armchair MBA
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

JQB, you're saying FLW wouldn't even have wanted the gas station to be kept standing indefinitely if it had ever been built???? What a heartless guy he was!

pit, looks like you read quite a bit into me just saying FLW's outlook is interesting. Even JQB the main advocate of preservation and rebuilding the Larkin Admin Bldg apparently agrees it's interesting. When did I ever say everyone should live on an acre of land? I sure don't. I won't criticize people who decide to do that is all. Diversity and choices are good.

replied to Armchair MBA
Score: 1 ( 1 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

It could be rebuilt with private donations but it would be expensive. FLW was notorious for the idiosyncratic materials and dimensions that make routine even maintenance of his buildings more expensive and troublesome. But oit would be great to start a campaign and see what happens...

Score: 5 ( 5 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Unfortunately, FLW was as big of an @$$ in real life as he was a great architect. By the end of his career, he cared nothing for his earlier achievements and was advancing concepts that would be laughed at by environmentalists today.

He designed dark homes for half-blind old ladies, threw temper tantrums when the furniture he designed was replaced with more comfortable and practical pieces, and had custom dresses made for Mrs. Martin so her outfits wouldn't clash with his architecture. Elsewhere, he designed a museum shaped like a toilet for art he didn't like (ever tried to hang a painting on a round wall, lol?), and defied structural engineers to achieve his vision (leading to perpetually leaky roofs).

Personality-wise, it's hardly a surprise that his own butler murdered FLW's mistress with an axe and burnt down his house.

The man was flawed in many ways. But his greatest works were built early in his career. The Larkin Building and Martin house are testament to that. Perhaps in 100 years we will consider Mel Gibson's and Michael Jackson's early works to be their greatest achievements, and forget about all their later controversies.

Either way, we should be foresighted enough to preserve what we have, and mourn what we have lost.

Score: 5 ( 5 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Here is a link that contains an article that I wrote in 1978 regarding the demolition of the Larkin Administration Building. At that time, it was the first written summary of the circumstances surrounding the demolition:

http://www.buffaloah.com/a/lark/hp.html

For a superb article about the end of the Larkin Co., read Howard Stanger's "Failing at Retailing: the decline of the Larkin Company, 1918-1942", recently published in the Journal of Historical Research in Marketing.

Next weekend, I will be hosting members of the Larkin family as they gather in Buffalo for a family reunion. Many are just learning about their link to Buffalo history.

Score: 2 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

This series, especially this article, as well as STEEL's most recent one was fascinating. I hope people continue to post articles on aspects of Buffalo's 'lost' history on BRO...perhaps an article once a week or so.

I'm particularly interested in seeing information/rare photos/images on things like the old rail stations in Buffalo (Lehigh Valley, DL&W, Old Exchange Street, and Terrace Stations)as well as the old trolley system that crossed the city. It would be cool to have more on the canals, erie county savings bank, Pan-Am Expo, Shelton Square, Iroquois Hotel... any of that! I realize that much of this has already been posted a while ago, but it's good to revisit them, from time to time.

Keep up the good work!

Score: 1 ( 1 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

FLW was a believer in evolving and advancing architecture. While there are those who pooh pooh his later work, the influence he had on modern architecture is unmistakable. One has to remember that FLW designed for well over 70 years. Had he kept the same style, he would have been a one note and not the (arguably) greatest architect this country has ever produced.

We celebrate Richardson's Buffalo State Hospital, yet we rarely mention the Dorsheimer House on Delaware as it does not appear to be "Richardsonian". The reason why these buildings are so disparate is a result of the architect's evolution. In contrast, there is a Richard Upjohn church in Westchester County that is a strikingly similar, yet smaller, version of the pre-1888 St Paul's Cathedral. The problem is these churches were built 30 years apart from each other.

To only consider FLW's work from 1896 to 1918 as his only viable period is a grave mistake. Falling Water is one of the most pioneering designs ever. The Guggenheim, despite it's seeming impractibility, does work as it traps the viewer and forces people to contemplate the art on its curved walls.

FLW had a love for his buildings. That he could accept the demise of one of his buildings speaks to that love. The Larkin was no longer his. The building had undergone so many disasterous alterations, his vision was signicantly bastardized. It puzzles me why there is talk of rebuilding. What purpose would that serve other than sating foolhardy nostalgia?

Score: 1 ( 3 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Usually an artists, architects finest work is in their early years even if they try to keep re-inventing themselves.

I guess we can put you in the camp of purists who dont want any building no matter its level of excellence regarding its period of design or the integral nature it created to a place.

But then if that were the case then we wouldnt have the pergola or the garage at the Martin Complex, BlueSky, the Gas Station or the Boathouse which all represent pieces of excellence and are now very much accepted as part of Buffalo.

But everyone has their opinion...mine simply comes from excellence. I see no difference between building a brand new Calatrava or rebuilding an old Sullivan or EB Green or McKimMeadWhite. I see no difference between building a new Federal Courthouse to contribute to a great space or rebuilding Erie Savings Bank to reconstruct Shelton Square.

replied to Delawarian
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

'But everyone has their opinion...mine simply comes from excellence.'

Is that what you think of your posterior perspective?

replied to JohnQBuffalo
Score: -1 ( 1 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

This is awesome, awesome stuff, but I wonder... "the Hydraulics neighborhood was a thriving, self-sufficient community within the larger City of Buffalo."

Self-sufficient?

Score: 1 ( 1 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Leave a comment

Buffalo Rising Poll