READING of the

SHOOK-SMATHERS HOUSE

Updated 3/31/2001

Conclusion:
"There are several early features in these two rooms, much of which supports the circa 1795 construction date."

A PRELIMINARY READING of the SHOOK-SMATHERS HOUSE Clyde, Haywood County

Prepared for Shook-Smathers House Preservation Committee

by A. L. Honeycutt, Jr. and John Horton

Restoration Branch -- NC Historic Preservation Office

September 22, 1995

(with comments by Bob Jones in red)

PURPOSE

The intent of the site visit on August 23, 1995, was to study the visible extant architectural and structural details on the building in order to arrive at a better understanding of the house's early configuration and character. Documentation suggests that the house was constructed in 1795 by Jacob Shook for his son Peter.

This comes from the "Oliver Report" of 1994. Peter of course was 5 years old in 1795 so this is unlikely if the house dates to 1795. The "Peter" story has been refuted by a person that knows from personal experience its origin. Julian Smathers relates that at some point in the early 1950s the family was "stting around" after a "get together" in the front yard when a carload of "yankees" from Indiana pulled up (Larry Shuck?). They inquired as to the location of the Shook House. Julian says that Mary Morgan told them that the Shook House had burned down years ago and that "this was the house he built for Peter". Somehow the story became part of the tale that is told, and has been heard over and over again. Peter lived in a home known as Mahala's House, after his wife, and this old home, acorss the creek from the Shook Smathers House burnt in 1980. It is rumored that Mahala's House was built around Jacob's first home at Clyde, a log cabin

Preliminary study of the house suggest that it is a late- 18th or early- 19th century structure with late- 19th century and early- 20th century additions and alterations.

EXTERIOR

Form and Plan

Physical evidence suggests that the original Peter Shook House was a two-and-one- half story frame dwelling with a steep side-gable roof and a two-story engaged porch extending the full width of the facade. In the roof structure just to the north of the center of the house, a definite settlement in the roofline is visible. This edge appears to be the extent of the original structure, confirmed by the additions to the original framing in the attic. The extension of the original attic framing over the present porch also suggests the existence of an original engaged porch. The present two-story wrap- around porch appears to be of late- 19th century vintage. In the upper hall, the wide pine flooring ends at the north wall of the hall, suggesting that this wall was originally the exterior wall of the house.

The square-shaped southeast rooms on the first and second floor appear to be the earliest surviving rooms. The assumed proportion of the original structure as well as the configuration of these early rooms suggests a hall-and-parlor plan. Framing evidence in the attic suggest the presence of a narrow room on both floors along the rear (west) of the house. However, late 19th and early 20th century renovations have obliterated the evidence for these rooms. No clues were observed as to the configuration of any other rooms in the original house, although it is possible that the primary "hall" of the house matched the configuration of the present stair hall.

Chimney

The chimney on the west gable end is constructed of handmade brick and sits on a rough stone foundation. The bricks are laid in a running bond. The shoulders at the transition to the stack are stepped. The chimney is second-quarter-nineteenth century in character and does not appear to be consistent with the circa 1795 construction date. The brickwork in a 1795 chimney would typically have been laid in Flemish bond, and the shoulders would typically be paved, not stepped. Overall, the form and detailing of this chimney are very similar to that of the circa 1850 John Wesley McElroy House in Burnsville, Yancey County. It is possible that the chimney could have been rebuilt. However, additional investigation is needed to confirm this assumption.

Looking closely at the foundation of the chimney it seems to appear that the more modern structure sits on several courses of sun dried brick, set on large flat stones. I would suppose that the rebuilding of the chimney was done around 1845 during the period after Mr Welch bought the house, and that is was constructed on the foundation of the old chimney built by Jacob Shook.

Other Exterior Features

The late-nineteenth century alterations to the house presumably involved replacing all the original siding. Therefore, the original siding and trim may not exist. The existing asbestos siding would need to be removed in order to confirm this assumption. The existing two-story porch is apparently the same depth as the original porch. The columns, trim, ceiling and balustrade have all been replaced so that no original fabric remains, with the possible exception of the floor structure. All of the windows in the house are late-nineteenth or early-twentieth century. There are several window sashes stored in the south side of the attic. The details and construction of these windows suggest that they may have been original to the house.

INTERIOR

Doors and Hardware

The only significant physical evidence from the house's early period survives in the two southeast rooms. Leading from the stair hall to the first floor parlor is a fine six- paneled door of Georgian-style influence. 3 The panels on the door are raised on both sides, which is an unusual feature for the western part of the state. There are ghost marks along the top and bottom rails of the door that indicate the door was originally hung with wrought iron strap hinges. The present hinges appear to be late nineteenth- century cast iron butts. There is evidence of extreme weathering on one side of the door, suggesting that it may have originally been an exterior door relocated to this location during the late nineteenth-century renovations.

The door to the second floor southeast room is similar to the first floor parlor door except that there is no evidence for earlier strap hinges. Instead, the door is hung with cast iron butt hinges which appear to be contemporary with the door. The hinges are a fast-joint, three-knuckle type, 2-1/4 inches wide by 3 inches long. The word "Patent" is stamped into one of the leaves. The screws for these hinges are flat tipped instead of gimlet pointed. This evidence suggests that they were in place prior to 1846. (see footnote) The lockset is a mid- to late-nineteenth century cast iron rimlock. Leading to the attic stair. a six-panel door of similar raised-panel style exhibits the same type of "Patent" butt hinges.

Flooring and Woodwork

At the inside comer of the room, below the attic stair, there is evidence that the floorboards had been infilled. The modem paneling on the stairway wall was not disturbed, but tapping on it revealed a void directly above this repair. It is possible that this was the location for the original stairway coming up from the first floor.

Where a portion of the later paneling has been removed, wide horizontal flush sheathing can be seen. Although the other walls could not be examined at this time without destructive means, it is assumed that these two early rooms were originally finished in similar flush sheathing.

The flooring throughout the southeast room and the stair hall of the second floor appears to be heart pine, approximately 6 inches wide. This flooring continues to the north wall of the stair hall. In the north east room, the flooring changes to a narrower pine.

In the first floor parlor, the fireplace surround appears to be a late-nineteenth century feature with its sawn and turned work and overmantle. In the second floor room, the fireplace surround is a very distinctive vernacular Georgian-style paneled wall with an arched firebox.

In these two rooms, the door casing is late-nineteenth-century in character. However, this trim has been installed over earlier casing that exhibits a beaded edge. This earlier trim was apparently set flush with the sheathing in the room, which was typical for the time period.

Attic

The framing in the attic is of pegged mortise-and-tenon construction, with studs and braces fastened by machine cut nails with handmade heads. The rafters are joined at the ridge with a lapped joint and are pegged.9 The center room of the attic is sheathed in wide unfinished boards. Some alterations in the framing and finish have been made over the years. It is assumed that the original attic room known as "the chapel" exhibited finished side and end walls. Since there is no evidence of flooring in the north or rear of the attic, it can be assumed that this space -- now open to the center room -- was originally only used for storage.

The framing lumber that could be inspected in the attic appears to be pit sawn, (see footnote) which is consistent with the circa 1795 construction date. However, the backs of the weatherboards show the pattern of a frame mill saw, suggesting that siding may have been replaced during renovations and additions. Selective removal of the asbestos siding will be necessary to inspect the weatherboards from the exterior and confirm this assumption.

Around the edge of the stair is an exceptionally fine vernacular balustrade. Its construction and detailing are consistent with the other early features in the house. The paneling in the stairway is also very well detailed, and together with the quality of the balustrade suggest that the attic room was intended to be seen as finished space.

Conclusions

There are several early features in these two rooms, much of which supports the circa 1795 construction date. The construction of the chimney is the only feature studied at this time that is not consistent with the late-eighteenth century period. Additional research on the "Patent" hinge is needed to confirm the earliest possible use of this hardware. Selective demolition on the later finishes will be required to confirm the extent of alterations to these rooms.

Preliminary study suggests that there is enough remaining historic fabric in these rooms as well as the attic to restore them to their original character and interpret them. Restoration work would include removal of the later renovations to expose the early finishes, reconstruction of the stairway from the parlor to the second floor room, and reconstruction of the parlor mantle. This work could be undertaken while leaving the remainder of the house intact. This approach for restoration and rehabilitation should be considered if the property is to be developed for uses other than as a historic house museum.

There could also be the consideration of restoring the entire house to its circa 1810 appearance (see footnote) in order to focus entirely on the early nineteenth-century architecture of the house as well as the early influence of Methodism in the region. This approach, of course, would require removal of all late-nineteenth- and early-twentieth-century alterations and additions. An academic restoration such as this is an extreme approach that would require a great deal of research and should be considered only if the house were to be developed as a historic house museum.

FOOTNOTES correspond with the footnotes in the original document

Footnotes for Page 4

The Georgian style spanned the period from 1714 to 1820. Especially in the remote western part of the state, stylistic influences arrived later and remained popular.

According to A. L. Honeycutt, Jr., this feature is sometimes seen in the eastern part of the state. He cannot recall ever having seen a door of this style in the western region.

The 1865 Russell and Erwin hardware catalogue does not show any three-knuckle hinges of this dimension. Earlier hardware catalogues need to be researched.

The process and machinery for manufacturing a pointed or gimlet tipped screw was patented in 1846. Until that time, screws were turned by hand, a process that resulted in a flat tip.

Footnotes for Page 5

Although stylistically more common in the early eighteenth century, such a feature is seen in houses in isolated regions up until the early nineteenth century.

Footnotes for Page 6

Early machine cut nails with handmade or wrought heads were used from ca. 1790 until about 1815.

This construction technique is typical up until the 1840's when the use of ridge boards became common.

Even after the introduction of water-powered saw mills, the method of sawing lumber in pits was common up into the early nineteenth century, especially in isolated regions of the state.

Marks left by a frame saw mill are very regular in spacing, and practically perpendicular to the board's edge.

Footnotes for Page 7

1810 was the date after which Bishop Asbury visited the house, subsequently leading to the construction of the attic "chapel", according to documentation cited by Duane Oliver in his report of 10/1/94.

Once again Oliver may "miss the mark" with this comment. There is no mention of the upper room by Asbury in 1810 but tradition of the founding of the Louisa Chapel says it occured in that room in 1798. The evidence presented here places the rooms creation in the early period as well. I believe the room is original to the house.

 Back to In The News Index