REPORT 2001 - 08

THE CHIMNEY STACKS OF THE KING'S BASTION BARRACKS:

POSSIBLE CUT-STONE CAPS AND REMOVAL OF THE MID-SLOPE STACKS

OF THE GOVERNOR'S WING

(1713-1758)

BY

ERIC KRAUSE

KRAUSE HOUSE INFO-RESEARCH SOLUTIONS

JANUARY 15, 2001

(II)

A CHIMNEY STACK AND ROOF SELECTION:

SELECT PAGES FROM RON WAY'S " THE CHATEAU ST. LOUIS,

AS BUILT 1720-1745"

THE CHATEAU ST. LOUIS, AS BUILT 1720-1745

BY R. L. WAY

FORTRESS OF LOUISBOURG,

JANUARY 6, 1961

INTRODUCTION

The Chateau St. Louis was designed to fill completely the gorge of the King's Bastion, a distance of some 358 feet, 8 inches. Commenced in 1720, it may be said to have been completed with respect to its principal architectural elements by 1743 ...

In 1745, its walls were rough-casted rubble masonry, strengthened and embellished at basement corners with cut-stone quoins. Cut-stone was also used for the ornamental gateways of the central passageway, for window surrounds in the Governor's wing and for the surrounds of principal doorways. The Chateau was heated by sixty-one fireplaces and a number of stoves, the separate flues being incorporated in twenty brick chimneys, each projecting more than two feet beyond the ridge of its black slate roofs. Red brick plinths, inserted at the level of the ground and first floors, brick pilasters and brick surrounds for all normal doors and windows, underscored architectural features and gave the building character. As initially designed, the building was slightly asymmetrical in that the large chapel windows in the south half of the main block were not balanced by any corresponding architectural feature in the north half. After 1731, when the walls and roof of the Governor's wing were raised ten pieds above the rest of the structure, the imbalance of architectural proportions was further accentuated. 

SPECIFICATIONS

I. MASONRY SHELL ...

4. Masonry walls

(a) Perimeter Walls, Footings to Roof Plate ...

In 1731, the walls of wing G were raised 6' 4 3/4'' (6 pieds) in order to provide higher ceilings for the Governor's first floor apartments. At the time, the plan was not only to raise the Governor's wing but to balance the structure by raising wing I as well. Perhaps unfortunately from the standpoint of the appearance of the Chateau, the Intendant's wing was never raised and the historical plan of 1731 is indicative only of intent so far as wing I is concerned. There is a possibility that the stone cornice shown on wing G in the 1731 plan was installed when the walls of this wing were raised but historical evidence is nothing more than a passing reference in 1751 to repairs to the masonry of the wing being effected from the plinth to the "entablement" (which might be interpreted to imply the inclusion of a cornice). Analysis of cut-stone found in the Chateau may possibly confirm the existence of a cornice on wing G. It is certain, however, that no historical evidence has been found to substantiate a cornice elsewhere in the building.

(b) Cross-walls

With the exception of the area of the chapel (see Plan Nos. 14 & 20), the Chateau was divided by fourteen masonry cross-walls, 2' 1 9/16' (2 pieds) thick. These walls extended from their footings to the ridge and were, of course, triangular in shape above the roof plate. Serving to strengthen the whole structure and to support the weight of the slate roof, the cross-walls created - excluding the chapel and the region of the central passageway - thirteen equal modules within the perimeter walls.

Fireplaces and chimneys erected in conjunction with the cross-walls will be specified separately, as will the east-west walls of the central passage which were of special design to support the clock tower.

(c) Longitudinal Separation Wall

In addition to the divisions created by the cross-walls, the main block of the Chateau - except in the area of the chapel and central passage - was bisected longitudinally by a separation wall. This wall continued into wings G and I but with offsets towards the east of approximately 3' 8 6/8" (3 1/2 pieds) at its junction with the most northerly and southerly cross-walls i.e. the cross-walls bisecting each wing. The effect was that the longitudinal wall of separation terminated in and supported the centre of the north and south perimeter walls.

There is clear proof that the longitudinal separation wall in the south half of the Chateau was built up to the ridge between the cross-wall of wing G and the south wall of the chapel. In the north half of the main block, the longitudinal wall was raised only to the height of the perimeter walls with the exception of that portion of it between the north wall of the passageway and the next cross-wall to the north. This latter section of the longitudinal wall was raised to the ridge in order to buttress the passageway wall which supported the sub-structure of the tower. On the ground floor level between rooms Sg 13 and Sg 14, utilized originally as a corps de garde, this same longitudinal wall was pierced by a sizeable archway connecting the two rooms. (See historical plan of 1729). Research has not produced any specified dimensions for the archway other than the item that when it was filled in in 1750 the masonry required amounted to the cubic measure of 1 toise, 6 pieds. When rooms Sg 13 and Sg 14 were the corps de garde, a 9 9/16" (9 pouces) masonry partition wall, located approximately 4 1/2 ' to the west of the archway, divided the guard room space into the customary separate accommodations for the officer and the men ...

(f) Fireplaces Ovens and Chimneys

The rooms of the Chateau were heated by means of sixty-one fireplaces and at times by a number of stoves, including the one shown in the 1731 historical plan in room Sg 14. The fireplaces were all incorporated in ten of the structure's cross-walls, with the exception of three fireplaces in the attic of wing G that are presumed to have been built originally in conjunction with the longitudinal wall. The distribution of ground floor fire places is believed to be as shown in the 1731 plan, their location having been confirmed by archaeology. No historical evidence is available concerning the placement of fireplaces on the first floor and unless further information is found it must be assumed, on the basis of flues detailed on a 1720 plan and what was typical as well, that the first floor fireplaces were situated approximately above those on the ground floor.

Flues of fireplaces, with the exception of those in the attic of wing G, were incorporated in twenty chimneys built into the cross-walls and passing through the roof approximately mid-way between the eave and the ridge. A plan of 1720 indicates the intended number of flues per chimney. It is of interest that the Governor's wing, the Officers' quarters and the wing built for the Intendant were to have fourteen more flues than were required to service the fireplaces, while the soldiers' barracks - when we allow for the flues of the bake-ovens have exactly the same number of flues as fireplaces. Historical evidence corroborates the use of both iron and brick stoves, but this luxury was obviously not intended for men in the ranks.

The two chimneys that serviced the three fireplaces in the attic of wing G proved unsatisfactory in that they created leakage. For that reason, De Forant had them taken down to roof level in 1739. No evidence has been found that they were ever re-erected.

The fireplaces and chimneys were supported on substantial masonry bases, many of the original French foundations still being in situ in the Chateau's basement. All chimneys were built of brick, were capped in brick and plastered on the inside. Repeated historical reference to the need for repairing chimney caps makes clear that complaints about the quality of the local brick were justified.

All fireplaces, except those of wing G were built of brick and the standard size appears to have been 4' 3" of width, 4' 4" of height with an arched top rising to a maximum of 4 1/4" above the latter measurement. One document refers to the acquisition of iron back-plates for thirty fireplaces, the back-plates being described as 2' 8" high by 2 ' 1 1/2" wide. The back-plates were said to be needed because the poor-quality brick was not standing up to the heat of the fires. No plans or documents have been found which provide the precise detail of fireplace designs and it would seem that resort must be made to the typical.

In the case of wing G, there were obviously some elaborations and refinements in fireplace construction. For example, it is stated in a 1744 document that the fireplace in the kitchen was made ''large" in that year and that it was rebuilt in stone. Conceding the use of stone in the kitchen of wing G, it is reasonable to suppose that at least some of the principal rooms of the Governor's apartments had fireplaces of stone, particularly since the use of cut-stone for window surrounds in this wing is confirmed. Some archaeological corroboration for this hypothesis is to be found in the pieces of a fluted stone mantel-piece that were discovered in the south half of the Chateau and are now on exhibition in the museum.

Such evidence as is available indicates that most hearths were constructed of brick, although this may not hold true for wing G. None of the specifications for the Chateau indicate how brick work was to be coursed or bonded, which could have been Dutch, English or Flemish. Reference must be made to what was most common in 18th century French construction.

Two large bricks ovens for the baking of bread were located in Sb 21 and Sb 22 respectively. They were of the bee-hive type and their remains were consolidated in the restoration of the 1930's. The vault of the oven in Sb 21 must have originally partially sustained the fireplace base above it, but at some time subsequent to the abandonment of the bakery in 1731 (likely faulty consolidation of ruins) the fireplace base was placed inside the oven, creating an impossible situation from the standpoint of baking bread. The doors of the ovens extended through the cross-walls into rooms Sb 19 and Sb 20 i.e. into the fire-backs of two large fireplaces, from the tops of which the flues ascended. This very common arrangement, with an oven in rear of a fireplace, existed also in the bakery of the Louisbourg hospital and is clearly shown on Boucher's plan of this building ...

II. CARPENTRY

1. Roof 

The original roof of the Chateau, which was shingled, leaked badly and this defect was attributed to an inadequate pitch. Between 1731 and 1735, the entire roof was replaced in order to raise the ridge, slate then being substituted for the previous wooden shingles. The ridge of the entire structure, with the exception of wing G, was elevated 2' 1 9/16" (2 pieds). In the latter wing, where the walls were concurrently being raised 6' 4 3/4" (6 pieds), the roof was raised an additional 4' 3 3/16" (4 pieds) so that its ridge was higher by 10' 7 15/16" (10 pieds) than the ridge in the remainder of the Chateau. In relation to sea level, the ridge of wing G would have had a final elevation of 80', while the ridge in the rest of the building had an elevation of 69' 4". The main block had a simple peaked roof, its ridge terminating in the wings. In the wings, the short ridge was at right angles to that of the main block and the sides towards the east were hipped ...

Initially, very small dormers were set in the attic roof immediately above each of the first floor windows. Documentary evidence establishes that between 1725 and 1727 every alternate dormer was eliminated, accounting for the lack of symmetry in dormer placement on the 1729 plan. when the shingle roof was replaced by slate, the dormers were relocated above the bays of the ground and first floors, as shown in the 1731 plan ...

Early documentary evidence refers to two dormers in the attic roof of the chapel, one to each side. These dormers contained oval windows, each with four panes of glass 6 3/8" X 8 1/2". Whether the windows were set in the same peak-roofed dormers as prevailed in the rest of the Chateau, or whether they were placed in the curved-roof dormers more customary for oval windows is not clear. In any case, there is the strong possibility that the dormers were eliminated from the chapel roof during its raising and slating, for there is no sign of them. on the 1731 plan ...

IV. PLASTERING...

1. Exterior

By 1738, all exterior rubble masonry of the Chateau including the central passageway had been rough-cast i.e. all of the outside of the structure except cut-stone and brick ornamentation ...

2. Interior

Interior plastering consisted of either a one-coat or two-coat treatment. The base or rough-coat, which the French referred to as "crepissage et enduite en mortier" (literally, rough-rendering and finishing in mortar) seems to have been applied to all interior masonry walls. While this treatment was all that was intended for the walls of the soldiers' barracks, in the case of wing G, ground floor officers' rooms and the chapel, the "crepi et enduits en mortier" was only the base-coat for a finish-coat in lime plaster.

Brick chimney breasts were also plastered, in conjunction with the walls, and the interior surfaces of all flues were plastered in mortar. Surprising as it may seen, there is a record of the stone dial of the clock having been plastered with lime in 1727 ...

VI . MATERIALS AND FINISHES...

(b) Flat-Stone (Pierre Plate)

This material was utilized for arches, for strengthening of the exterior corners of the wings behind the brick facing, for some paving and for chimney bases. Flat-stone was initially obtained near the Mira but in 1726 the contractor, Ganet, complained that he had to transport it 20 leagues to Louisbourg. It would appear to have been secured from shallow limestone beds.

(c) Cut-Stone

The cut-stone incorporated in the Chateau was produced from free-stone secured from a variety of sources at different times. Initially, native limestone was brought from L'Indienne, la Baie des Espagnols and l'Ile Justeaucorps. The Isle Royale stone proved unsatisfactory and by 1725 free-stone was being brought from France as ballast in the King's ships. Most of the French stone came from the Charente and much of it was sand-stone ...

3. Brick

In the initial construction of the Chateau, the brick employed was of local manufacture, coming either from Port Toulouse or la Baie des Espagnols. It had the defect of being quite porous and scaled badly when employed on exterior work. New England brick, acquired by illicit commerce, gradually replaced the native brick as repairs were required.

Standard size of French brick during the first part of the 18th century was as follows:

I.

- Length - 8 13/16"

- Width - 4 7/16"

- Thickness - 2 5/32"

It has been previously mentioned that none of the Louisbourg specifications stipulate the type of bonding that was to be used in the laying of brick. A clue may exist in the fact that bricklayers from Flanders were imported to work on the Chateau - it may be that they used their own Flemish bond ...