Introduction
The New Orleans Pharmacy Museum provides a material link to the historical development of pharmacy in the new world and the laws implemented to regulate the trade and elevate it into a profession. During the late 1930s to 1950, when Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr., received official recognition as the first state-issued pharmacy license holder in the United States, his pharmacie became incorporated into the destination image of New Orleans. The New Orleans Pharmacy Museum’s development and Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr.’s, recognition occurred by chance after the discovery that the property had housed a pharmacy for most of the 1800s. An even more fortuitous coincidence occurred when research revealed that the site had been built by a man who held the first United States-issued license to practice pharmacy. These surprising facts were then shaped, solidified and used by competing groups. Finally, the building and the man were assigned a specific role within the development of urban tourism in New Orleans, and the complex issue of medical education and licensing were simplified for public consumption in a tourist-oriented economy.
In a previous discussion, published in Pharmacy in History about the welter of laws that surrounded medical education, examination and licensing, no clear winner in the race to be named first truly emerges. Jean Peyroux, François Grandchamps and L. J. Dufilho, Jr., all have a legitimate claim to be “first,” by one reason or another.1 How did this complex history crystallize around the person of Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr., in the late 1930s to 1950, when Dufilho, Jr.’s, pharmacie, known as the La Pharmacie Française, opened as a museum to the public? What processes were occurring in the early 20th century that placed Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr., in the spotlight while removing Grandchamps and Peyroux from the stage and relegating them to mere footnotes in medical histories? Most important, what was truly commemorated at the New Orleans Pharmacy Museum in 1950?
During the early 1900s, New Orleans remade itself from a male-dominated conventioneer’s city to a modern, urban tourist destination. Parts of this shift resulted from an expansion of transportation in Louisiana during the late 1920s and early 1930s,2 and the moral clean-up of New Orleans during the late 1910s and 1920s, driving prostitution and gambling into the shadows.3 Civic planners and the business community modernized the infrastructure of New Orleans,4 and set about preserving historic buildings in the French Quarter, an effort that began in 1916 and gathered steam throughout the 1920s and 1930s.5
Another element included the altering of public image. In 1900, New Orleans enjoyed an international reputation as a mecca of decadence and sexual indulgence that proved to be a natural draw for the male-dominated business class and helped New Orleans become a popular convention city. With the closure of Storyville in 1917,6 followed by the advent of Prohibition in 1920, the city lost major aspects of its sinfully attractive civic image that had helped produce a major revenue stream for the city. Civic leaders needed to replace the lost income, and tourism, via a new image, proved to be a practical substitute. The business community began to craft a destination image of New Orleans that relied on promoting the unique character of the city as Creole and Gallic, yet projected an image of the city as forward thinking and progress-oriented at the same time.
French historian, Pierre Nora, in describing a topographical lieux de mémoire (places of memory), states, “there are topographical ones (lieux), which owe everything to the specificity of their location and to being rooted to the ground—so, for example, the conjunction of sites of tourism and centers of historical scholarship.”7 The development of urban tourism in New Orleans, centered on the Vieux Carré [French Quarter], fits this definition. Two major aspects—historic preservation and crafting of image—are of major significance in the development of La Pharmacie Française.
Crafting a New Calling Card
Since the loss of part of the city’s public identity in the late 1910s to 1920—an identity based on drinking, gambling and prostitution— a new image had to be fashioned that appealed to a wider audience to accommodate the evolution in the use of public space and gender roles, particularly in regards to women. According to Sociologist Kevin Fox Gotham, a “destination image” is a series of visual cues and verbal descriptors that provide the viewer-consumer a familiar iconography to bestow a context for understanding the cultural attractions of city or locality.8 This new image brought to the forefront the Creole French heritage of New Orleans.9 Gotham identifies some other ideas used in crafting a destination image of New Orleans, including the French Quarter, French and Spanish architecture, Mardi Gras, and “scenes of romance and mystery.”10
In the 1920s, local preservationists, a large number of them women, became intensely interested in preserving the special character of the French Quarter, which had deteriorated into a slum.11 By the late 1930s, New Orleans civic and business leaders had moved to the forefront of the preservation movement and built on the foundations laid by the 1920s preservationists of consciously developing the French Quarter as a center of tourism or a lieux de mémoire.
In 1936, Robert S. Maestri took office as mayor of New Orleans and he immediately became a major proponent of tourism development. According to Jack Williams, reporter for the Journal Post of Kansas City, Maestri’s interest in tourism development naturally stemmed from his business interests before becoming mayor. These interests included owning the local ballpark and race track and developing real estate holdings that could be strategically leased to take advantage of tourist interest in New Orleans night life.”12
During Maestri’s first administration, civic improvement proved to be the leitmotif of the city. The city gave money to finance the symphony, the New Orleans Ballet Association, the National Cotton Carnival, and to restore convents.13 In 1938 and 1939, Maestri assumed responsibility for the clean-up and maintenance of Canal Street. Since being renovated about ten years earlier,14 Canal Street had become littered with trash, and its iconic terrazzo sidewalks were marred by discarded gum. Councilman A. Miles Pratt suggested cleaning the area to impress visitors, as well as to placate the owners of major department stores along the thoroughfare. After some trial and error, Maestri instituted a regular schedule of cleaning Canal Street. Workers scoured the street five times daily, attended by two shifts of street cleaners who removed trash. At night, a ten-man team would scrub the terrazzo tiles using soap and steel wool, removing gum with hand scrapers or straight-end hoes. These men managed to clean about three blocks in a six-hour shift.15
Maestri also had an interest in historic preservation, which, in 1937, led him to purchase the property at 514-516 Chartres Street—associated in local legend with Napoleon Bonaparte— with the intention of donating it to the city to be used as a museum dedicated to Napoleon. This move was not without precedent. In 1916, a local banker with business interests in the tobacco industry, William Irby, donated the funds to completely restore St. Louis Cathedral, which had fallen into a state of disrepair. During the 1920s, so many properties were being donated to the city that local businessman Charles Claiborne grumbled, “giving over of another public building to be administered by the city would mean one more dirty, badly kept building in the city of New Orleans.”16
In late November 1929, Mayor Arthur J. O’Keefe had agreed to the purchase of the Pontalba apartments by the city. Though the economic picture of the United States had recently turned bleak, O’Keefe justified the purchase stating that, “there are those among us, who tiring and chaffing under care and business strains, [enjoy] wandering in Jackson Square, to lose themselves in the past.”17 In 1930, the city finally closed the deal to purchase the properties with the Louisiana State Museum taking ownership of the apartments.18 In April 1936, the Lower Pontalba, described as part of a “group of old New Orleans landmarks,”19 had undergone major restoration and renovation. Efforts included the replacement of 2,832 square feet of plaster and 159 squares of roofing, laying 28,000 bricks, installing $6,300 worth of electrical and plumbing work and a $3,500 sprinkler system with funds provided by the Works Progress Administration (WPA).
Mayor Maestri probably believed the oft-repeated tale that 514-516 Chartres had been built as a potential home for Napoleon if he escaped from St. Helena. At this time, different properties in the Quarter had rumors and legends attached to them such as the notorious La-Laurie House at 1140 Royal Street and Lafitte’s Blacksmith Shop at 941 Bourbon Street.20
Historic preservation relies on creating a public image and clarifying the legends surrounding a property is a key ingredient in constructing civic image. “Making stories about area attractions uniform prevented tourists from hearing conflicting tales told by local guides.”21 Matching legends and histories to their proper locations was part of this effort to construct a viable and consistent image of the French Quarter that conveyed authenticity to viewers.
Maestri’s plan for a museum linked to a famous French personality reinforced the French-Gallic identity the city was attempting to promote to the world. In 1895, this flawed designation of a French Quarter home for Napoleon first appeared in print when Henry C. Castellanos mentioned the building in his book, New Orleans as it Was.22 In 1907, a Times-Picayune article, “The True Story of Napoleon’s House,” reinforced Castellanos’ error:
That the house on the corner of Chartres and St. Louis Streets—500 to 506 Chartres to be more exact—which has been foisted upon an innocent public as the intended residence of Napoleon, was Nicholas Girod’s mansion, where the plot was hatched and where the dramatic banquet was held. Napoleon’s intended address stands two doors below, 514 Chartres.23
The reporter explains that Castellanos heard the tale from “the late General John L. Lewis.” The newsman also conducted a short interview with H. B. Seebold, who claimed that he often heard the historian Charles Gayarré declare that 514-516 Chartres was Napoleon House.24 The piece concludes that the property “has degenerated to a liquor shop, dangling a ‘To Let’ sign.”25
In 1937, when Maestri took an interest in 514-516 Chartres, it had just undergone a series of emergency measures to stabilize the structure, which had been abandoned for some time. A New Orleans Item article recounted the repairs made to the building on the verge of collapse. The property, acquired by Interstate Trust and Banking Company in April 1937, was being sold as part of the company’s liquidation. Interstate officials stated they could only afford to do the work necessary to keep the building standing. The complete restoration of the building had to be the responsibility of others. When Interstate Trust and Banking bought the building, the exterior brick walls had to be stabilized as the brick had started to bulge outward, which is a sign of imminent collapse. Stabilizing the wall was a lengthy process—metal anchors had to be sunk into the brick walls and slowly pulled more tightly together over a period of months, eventually bringing the wall back into line. Wooden arches had also been erected along the first floor to help steady the building.26
While the structure had been salvaged for the moment, actual restoration needed to be done to save the building. According to the writer of the article, the “Napoleon” building needed a rescuer.27 The roof required repair and the second and third floors were badly decayed with the floors themselves described as “shaky.”28
Interstate Trust and Banking officials privately hoped that the city would take over the property and “operate it as an authentic museum of early New Orleans.”29 A three-thousand-dollar price tag had been placed on the property, and company officials reassured the community that the property would need only a “few more thousand” in repairs.30
The New Orleans Item article also referred to the ongoing debate between which property— 514-516 Chartres Street or 500 Chartres Street— could rightly claim the designation of “Napoleon House.” As for 514-516 Chartres Street, the article stated that the property, built in 1822, had been known for many years as Pharmacie Dufilho, “after an old pharmacist who had lived there.”31 One can only wonder how Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr., would have felt at being dismissed so lightly.
Harnett Kane: From Muckraker to Passionate Preservationist?
The dispute surrounding which building rightfully held which history proved to be a serious and contentious one. In 1937, New Orleans Item reporter, Harnett Kane, author of the infamous and vehement anti-Huey Long book, Louisiana Hayride: The American Rehearsal for Dictatorship, 1928-1940, wrote a series of exposés about the decay and destruction of the French Quarter, an area he referred to as a “Mecca for Tourists.”32 In an article dated August 5, 1937, Kane argued that the city had done nothing to protect the Quarter while buildings were being destroyed, ironwork balconies torn down and the original built environment disappeared. According to Kane, the French Quarter drew about $10,000,000 annually, more money than generated by any other source in the city.33 In addition to writing articles, Kane also actively tried to influence preservation efforts using back channels.
Advertisment for Dufilho, Jr. Drug and Medicine Store from the 12 November 1823 edition of the Louisiana Gazette.
Kane’s article recounted that City Architect Morris DePass had issued two permits for work in the French Quarter, one for the tear-down of a building and another for altering a different property. The Vieux Carré Commission (VCC), created in 1924 to assist in overseeing the preservation of the French Quarter, had finally acquired more regulatory powers by 1937.34 Nevertheless, at a VCC meeting held the day before (August 4, 1937), the Commission did not discuss the permits recently issued by De-Pass, even though, as Kane’s article pointed out, permits of this type required the approval of the VCC, in accordance with city ordinance 14,538 (dated March 3, 1937). DePass admitted to acting on his own authority independent of the VCC, explaining that the buildings concerned did not have historic value.
Kane criticized DePass for breaking the law in issuing the permits without VCC approval, and he fingered the city architect as the culprit in tearing down balconies and approving new construction in the caption accompanying two large, prominently placed photographs alongside Kane’s story. While Kane did not explicitly criticize the VCC, he did make it a point to inform the public that the VCC had ignored DePass’s actions, and that the Quarter was vulnerable to modernization, an opinion held by historians, residents and “others interested in this unique section.”35 Kane noted that efforts to change and modernize the Quarter had been picking up speed over the preceding year.36
In a letter to Mayor Maestri after this meeting, William Boizelle, the Secretary of the VCC, complained about Kane, writing that he felt that Kane had acted as a front for “certain parties.”37 A second unsigned letter in Maestri’s correspondence also probably written by Boizelle and addressed to L. C. Le Sage, the chairman of the VCC, discussed Kane’s reporting and described the meeting in greater detail.38 During the August 4th meeting, Boizelle had read a letter from a Mrs. Lemann complaining about DePass’ condemenation of a property at Dumaine and Royal streets.39 In response, Boizelle advised that this issue could cause a major problem, because the VCC did not have the funds to erect new properties.40
Rear view of 514-516 Chartres. Used with permission of Nancy Bister, administrator of Old New Orleans web site. http://www.thepastwhispers.com/Old_New_Orleans.html.
Harnett Kane approached Boizelle after the meeting and requested that the secretary, as a member of the three-person team appointed to investigate the “so called Napoleon House,”41 confirm 514-516 Chartres as being Napoleon House. Boizelle explained to Kane that if it should be found that the house did not have a connection to Napoleon, Boizelle would go on record with that information. Boizelle claimed that Kane had been pushing for someone to take on the burden of restoring the building, which would cost about $13,000.42
By his actions Kane placed himself among the preservationists; yet why would Kane attempt to force the designation of 514-516 Chartres Street as Napoleon House?
Creation of a Destination Image for New Orleans, 1920s and 1930s
Kane’s efforts would seem to be in accord with businessmen, civic organizations and politicians who were in the process of creating a new destination image of the city. In 1932, the Association of Commerce, an organization of businessmen dedicated to developing New Orleans as a site of manufacture and commerce, unveiled its new advertising campaign, placing advertisements in National Geographic magazine and newspapers in Chicago, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Detroit. In one advertisement, a pictorial representation of the French Quarter carried the slogan, “Romance of France Just a Day Away.”43
By 1939, the Association published what it considered the five qualities of New Orleans. History and romance ranked at the top, with “Modern Progress” ranking fifth.44 One example of this advertising, The Vieux Carré: A Trip Through Old New Orleans, published by the Association during the 1930s, exemplified the messages the Association wanted to convey. The publication’s title and its large enclosed “Map for a Promenade Through the Historic Vieux Carré of New Orleans,” reflected the dedication of the Association to promoting the unique history of New Orleans. With only two paragraphs allotted to areas outside New Orleans—Grand Isle and St. Tammany—promoting the region for business and manufacturing remained a minor priority.45
It appears that the destination priorities of the Association changed between 1932 and 1939. During the 1920s and 1930s, the receding of business-oriented promotion reflected the times both in the country and in Louisiana. The Depression had a strong negative impact on manufacturing and businesses across the country and in New Orleans. In Louisiana, tourism offered a viable replacement income that removed the some of the weight of taxation off local residents.46
Governor Huey P. Long made it difficult for New Orleans to do business and left behind an anti-business stigma that lasted for many years. When the city found itself in financial difficulty in the early 1930s, for example, Governor Long cut funding meant for New Orleans. The national press perceived his tactics as intimidation and the resulting publicity as “making the city seem at times more a war zone than a tourist retreat.”47 In 1934, the country watched newsreels that showed the city in the worst possible light, with images of the National Guard, called in by Governor Long during the city’s municipal elections, in a face-off with the New Orleans police department, which was reinforced by 500 extra police officers, deputized by Mayor Walmsley. The members of the Association of Commerce could only shake their heads.48
According to historian Pierre Nora, “ours in an intently retinal and powerfully televisual memory.”49 To combat the slum appearance of the French Quarter and negate the violent images of early 1930s New Orleans, artists —again led by women of the community such as Alberta Kinsley—promoted the destination image of New Orleans that focused on the built environment rather than people or maufacturing. Artists of the Kinsley School set out to “capture the romantic aura of faded stucco, tropical plants, and iron lace balconies,”50 of the French Quarter. While the run-down atmosphere of the Quarter in the early 1920s failed to impress visitors, writers and artists changed that image into one of romance and history. According to Anthony Stanonis, “French Quarter preservation—and tourism for that matter—depended upon the careful crafting of the neighborhood’s malleable image.”51
Considering the passion for preservation active in the city during this period along with the push to make a Gallic yet progressive destination image, Kane’s push to declare or designate 515-516 Chartres “Napoleon House” was understandable if a bit underhanded.
Exactly What Did Maestri Buy?
A New Orleans Item article dated September 30, 1937 stated that work would soon start on “Napoleon House.”52 While the article was incorrect in that the Mayor did not close on the building until December 16,53 it did explain that the Mayor paid for the building from his own pocket and intended to donate it to the city for the purposes of creating a museum to show “the more gracious, more spacious life of earlier New Orleans.”54 This purchase by the Mayor saved unknowingly one of the French Quarter’s more famous buildings but Maestri’s plans for the building had changed. He now planned a museum that would be the first of its kind in the city to demonstrate the interior of an early New Orleans dwelling.55
Maestri probably hoped that this move would inspire other individuals to make similar purchases and restorations (which surprisingly, it did), and that the refurbishment of 514-516 Chartres Street would draw more visitors to the Quarter. WPA workers, who had done restoration work on the Pontalba project during the early 1930s, provided a ready source of skilled craftsmen, while the renovation itself would be funded by the WPA. Mayor Maestri announced that he would graciously accept donations of furnishings for the proposed museum, which would be free of charge to the public.56
The designation of 514-516 Chartres as Napoleon House, however, started to come under dispute. The September 30th article retold the famous legend of the daring local men who dreamed of rescuing Napoleon and housing him at 514-516 Chartres Street after his escape, but the article also referred to Historian Stanley Clisby Arthur’s claim that the location was not, in fact, Napoleon House.57 Stanley had debunked the myth in his 1936 book, Old New Orleans: A History of the Vieux Carré, Its Ancient and Historical Buildings. Stanley pointed out that the property at 514-516 Chartres was built in 1822 or 1823, after Napoleon’s death as reported in New Orleans newspapers on September 10, 1821. Stanley listed the property at 514-516 as the Pharmacie Dufilho while referring to the property at 500 Chartres Street as Napoleon House.58 In his entry for the Pharmacie Dufilho, Arthur made no mention of the house or owner being the first of anything, though he noted that Dufilho, Jr., was a “popular druggist of the old city.”59
While the myth had been discredited, public confusion still reigned, and Maestri bought the building in December 1937, donating it to the city and the Louisiana State Museum on the 31st of that month, “being for the purpose of a museum.”60 A property title search also revealed the ownership by Dufilho of the property at 514-516 Chartres Street.61
Nonetheless, this donation received the approval of the business community, as conveyed through the Association of Commerce, which noted that visitors loved to visit the Quarter and that the Quarter was of great advantage in drawing tourists.62 By 1937, the image of the French Quarter, with its mystery and romance, Creole-Gallic culture, graceful architecture, and history around every corner started to take root—the Vieux Carré had become a lieux de memoire.63
Even though Arthur had exposed the true histories of the two properties, this did not seem to catch on with the press or civic officials. The New Orleans Item continued to run articles about the property, calling it both the Pharmacie Dufilho and Napoleon House throughout September and October 1937.64 A letter, dated May 21, 1938, from William Boizelle, Secretary of the VCC to L. C. Le Sage, President of the VCC, referred to the property as the Pharmacie Dufilho, but noted that it was still popularly known as Napoleon House. Boizelle urged Le Sage to get Mayor Maestri to start referring to the property as the Pharmacie Dufilho, as the designation, “Napoleon House,” was historically inaccurate. Boizelle feared that the mayor would supply visitors with, “a big laugh” if Maestri continued to refer to the property as Napoleon House.65
What motive did Maestri have in continuing to promote 514-516 Chartres Street as Napoleon House? While the house was known to have housed a pharmacy run by a man named Dufilho, Dufilho had not yet been recognized as the first of anything. In fact, Dufilho was referred to as an “old pharmacist,” in the September 14, 1937 article in the New Orleans Item,66 and as simply a “pharmacist” on September 30, 1937.67
The explanation could well lie in a letter written in 1939 by Frank A. March, Director of the Project Control Division of the Louisiana branch of the Works Progress Administration, to District 2 House Representative Paul H. Maloney.68 In his letter, March informed Maloney that the project described in the attachment was considered, “accepted for inclusion in the program.”69 In the attachment, no street address is listed for the project though it is referred to as “Napoleon House” and the description noted that the property needed a budget of $44,136 dollars to refurbish the site, “to be used as a museum.”70 The report’s use of the name “Napoleon House” and discussion of a museum clarified that it was the Pharmacie Dufilho under discussion.71
When choosing projects, it could not be expected that a project focused on a relatively unknown pharmacist of the early National era would catch the eye of the State Works Progress Administrator. On the other hand, Napoleon House would highlight a an important historical personality with a significant impact on United States History. In 1803, Napoleon sold over 800,000 square miles of French North American colonial possessions to the United States, doubling the country’s size of overnight.
Napoleon acted as a powerful calling card for the city. In a pamphlet published by the Association of Commerce in the 1930s, 16 Delightful, Different Days in and around New Orleans—America’s Most Interesting City, the Association suggested Day Seven as a day to be spent exploring New Orleans’ museums like the Presbytere, Delgado, and the Cabildo. The authors mentioned that the the death mask of Napoleon was one of many “enthralling” exhibits at the Cabildo.72 This pamphlet emphasized certain themes such as the city’s French heritage, the antebellum plantation lifestyle (“revel in the relics of one of the most amazing eras of American Agriculture”), the Creole culture centered in the French Quarter, and the city’s importance to American history. The third day suggested that a visit to “the Plains of Chalmette…. The field of battle—where in 1815 Andrew Jackson with the aid of the Pirate Lafitte defeated General Pakenham under the spreading oaks of Versailles will grip your interest.”73
By 1939, when Maestri attempted to secure funds from the WPA to renovate and restore the museum, the economy and social climate had shifted to war preparations. The project seems to have been dropped in order to funnel funds and operations into the war effort.74 According to an unsigned report dated 1950 found among the papers of Dr. Edward J. Ireland, a timeline states that the building was “unfit for use” from 1937 to 1947.75
Creating a Homeless Collection
In 1933, Dean John F. McCloskey of the Loyola University College of Pharmacy started using antique pharmacy equipment in class lectures,76 and, in time, proved to be an inveterate collector of the material remains of the pharmacy profession. This collecting by McCloskey reflected trends that developed after the Civil War into the 20th century that saw the start of the construction of museums dedicated to science and industry.77 According to historian Pierre Nora, this desire to collect can be explained because “every established group, intellectual or not, learned or not, had felt the need to go in search of its own origins and identity.”78 Nora also observed that the most significant collections of biology, music, medicine, and physics are owed to the professionals working in those fields, not professional historians.”79 McCloskey stored these items in four rooms in the basement of his home, before they were removed to the pharmacy museum in 1949.80
Loyola University College of Pharmacy Dean John F. McCloskey featured on the cover of Pulse of Pharmacy in 1957.
A 1934 letter written by I. L. Lyons, President of I. L. Lyons and Company to McCloskey, informed McCloskey of some show globes81 available for possible donation from Mr. S. J. Peters and Mr. L. G. Butler.82 Lyons’ letter illustrated one of the acquisition tactics used by McCloskey. The Dean would network through acquaintances and business contacts, who, in turn, would solicit donations through their contacts. Thus informed, McCloskey wrote Butler to inquire about the show globes. McCloskey explained that he would like to acquire the globe for use in the Pharmacy Museum and offered to list Butler as the donor. To sweeten the deal, McCloskey proposed to “pay for all crating and transportation costs.”83
McCloskey decided to establish a pharmacy museum on the Loyola College of Pharmacy campus, although he had also considered housing the collection at the Cabildo.84 In
1939, Dr. Edward J. Ireland, a former student of pharmacist-historian Edward Kremers, joined the staff of Loyola’s College of Pharmacy and worked with McCloskey on the pharmacy museum idea.85 The idea of placing the museum on the campus of Loyola was still under consideration as late as February 1941,86 but, by April, it seems that McCloskey and Ireland had decided to explore the idea of placing the museum somewhere in the French Quarter.87 Help in finding a location for the museum would come from the New Orleans business community.
Mae Le Grand-Crumb, Interior Decorator and Preservationist
Mrs. Mae Le Grand-Crumb, a New Orleans native, lived in the French Quarter at 502 St. Peters.88 Le Grand-Crumb was at the forefront of female preservationists who promoted the preservation of the French Quarter during the 1920s. Anthony Stanonis writes that “elite women exercised their voting rights and redirected energy… to save the oldest part of New Orleans.”89 During the 1920s, Le Grand-Crumb joined Le Petit Theatre de Vieux Carré, working on the producing committee, giving Le Grand-Crumb a tenuous link with famous Quarter preservationist Elizabeth Werlein, who would occasionally appear in Le Petit Theatre productions.90
In 1940, Le Grand-Crumb became more directly and publicly involved in historic preservation, joining the publicity committee of the Beauregard Ball, a fundraiser to restore and preserve Beauregard House, the former home of both Confederate General P. G. T. Beauregard and chess master Paul Morphy. This house fit New Orleans’ destination image, showcasing the history of the Antebellum and Confederate eras, as well as, the biography of Paul Morphy, a more recent New Orleans luminary.91
By April 1941, Le Grand-Crumb had moved her antique shop and interior decorating business to 518 Chartres Street, a building that had recently undergone renovation and restoration.92 This restoration directly stemmed from the purchase of 514-516 Chartres Street by Mayor Maestri.93 The owners of 518 Chartres figured it worth the investment to restore the building on what would hopefully become a rejuvenated street. When Le Grand-Crumb moved in, she did so with the understanding that the Mayor would “revive the old Napoleon House.”94
Dean McCloskey had a long-standing interest in pharmacies located in the Quarter, and as a younger man, he had discovered the Dufilho Pharmacy during his research. McCloskey is on record admitting that if it were not for the fact that the pharmacy had been rumored to be Napoleon House, he never would have remembered the pharmacy.95 In 1941, several newspaper articles about a potential museum at 514-516 Chartres Street, including one which referenced, “the ancient drug store to be set up in the Vieux Carre,”96 reminded the Dean about his previous reseach about the Dufilho Pharmacy. Before McCloskey could follow up, Ireland visited 514-516 Chartres Street, where he made the acquaintance of Le Grand-Crumb, and she suggested that since a pharmacy had once been located in “Napoleon House,”97 a pharmacy museum might be a good idea for the location. While Le Grand-Crumb could claim to be a preservationist, she seemed more interested in the restoration of 514-516 Chartres Street to increase street traffic for her business.98
This meeting between representatives of Loyola’s College of Pharmacy and Le Grand-Crumb proved significant for the future. In June 1941, McCloskey and Ireland had a discouraging visit to the building in the company of members of the Vieux Carré Commission. According to a report written by McCloskey, “We do not care to go in it [514-516 Chartres Street] unless it is the last place we can find for the museum.”99 The building was in bad shape and considered too large for Loyola’s needs, and the Vieux Carré Commission occupied the upper levels of the building.100
The VCC took measures to protect its interests, arranging in May 1941 for the passage of New Orleans City Ordinance 15,303101, which granted the VCC full possession of 514-516 Chartres Street, “for the use as its headquarters and as an Historical Museum.”102 Not only did the VCC now have full possession of the building, it was also in charge of all rules and regulations for management and maintenance. In addition, any funds raised from the use of the building belonged to the VCC, to be deposited in the Vieux Carré Commission bank account.103 Loyola understandably wished to avoid putting their collection under VCC’s control.
McCloskey, Ireland, and Le Grand-Crumb continued to work together to find a proper location for the pharmacy museum in the French Quarter. Le Grand-Crumb enlisted the services of local real estate agents and canvassed her contacts at Le Petit Theatre de Vieux Carré. McCloskey and Ireland enlisted the help of Stanley Arthur to assist in identifying all drug stores located in the French Quarter.104
David L. Cowen Sorts Things Out
In the early 1940s, Professor David L. Cowen of Rutgers University decided to look into the matter of Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr. Cowen, who received his bachelor’s and master’s degrees from Rutgers, had joined the faculty in 1933, where he taught the history of pharmacy.105 The impetus for Cowen’s specific interest in 514-516 Chartres Street is unclear, but McCloskey may have had a hand in it. Cowen dedicated his 1943 article, “A Roster of the Licensed Apothecaries of Louisiana, 1816-1847,” “To Dean John F. McCloskey, whose interest prompted this information into its present form.”106 Cowen subsequently published four articles in 1942 and 1943 about pharmacy laws and Louisiana.
Rutgers University Professor David L. Cowen poses with a seventeenth-century pharmacopeia. Cowen and his research were featured in the February 1952 (vol. 3, no. 12) issue of Report from Rutgers.
In 1942, Cowen’s first articles, a 2-part piece published in the May and June issues of the Journal of the American Pharmaceutical Association, discussed the development of laws and licensing in the United States with signficiant material about New Orleans and Louisiana. In the first article, Cowen devoted four pages to laws and licensing in Louisiana, while four states (South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and New York) got the last two pages.107 The Orleans territorial legislature’s 1808 Act Concerning Physicians, Surgeons and Apothecaries was the earliest legislation that Cowen discussed, omitting the 1804 New Orleans city ordinance or the legislation passed by Spanish Governor O’Reilly in 1770.108
In this article, Cowen observed that the 1816 Act is the first act of its kind passed “by a state legislature,” the emphasis supplied by Cowen himself.109 He also noted that the Act required a pharmacist to be part of the medical board to conduct exams in order to issue liscenses. While Cowen had access to Gibson’s Guide and Directory of the State of Louisiana and the Cites of New Orleans and Lafayette (1838), which listed pharmacists active in the city,110 he did not yet reveal the names listed in the directory, preferring to focus on the significance of the legislation itself.
The second half of the article, “America’s First Pharmacy Laws, Part Two,” proved to be the pivotal moment that made possible the amalgamation of person-place-history in the figure of Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr., at 514-516 Chartres as the “First Pharmacist.” Cowen examined the lack of pharmacy licensing legislation prior to 1868 in the United States, the factors that permitted such a situation to exist, and what motivated change within the pharmaceutical community. Cowen again referenced New Orleans and Louisiana, citing the 1808 Act and the 1816 Act.111 In particular, he talked about the success of Louisiana’s 1816 Act.
Cowen fully utilized the information from the 1838 Gibson’s Guide and Directory of the State of Louisiana and the Cites of New Orleans and Lafayette. The directory contained an article, “Medical Board of Louisiana,” which publisher John Gibson included after the public requested a list of licensed medical practitioners.112
This list, which Cowen reproduced in 1943, recorded two men who had received pharmacy licensing in 1816—François Grandchamps and L. J. Dufilho.113 Using this new information, Cowen dethroned the then currently acknowledged “First Licensed Pharmacist,” Richard Johnson of South Carolina, who, in 1818, had received a license to practice.114
This article proved to be the breakthrough 514-516 Chartres Street needed. While historian Stanley C. Arthur’s myth-busting and a title search of the property had previously uncovered information about owner Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr.,115 this information did not provide a compelling reason to salvage the building as a museum. People continued to refer to the location as Napoleon House, as (historically speaking), the association with Napoleon was far more recognizable to the general public than a relatively unknown, early-National era pharmacist. The publication of part two of “America’s First Pharmacy Laws,” however, followed by two additional Cowen articles in April 1943 further bolstered Grandchamps and Dufilho’s claims to being the first licensed pharmacists in the United States and suddenly gave 514-516 Chartes Street a raison d’etre.116
The April 1943 Cowen article, “Louisiana, Pioneer in the Regulation of Pharmacy,” published in the Louisiana Historical Quarterly, demonstrated how quickly Cowen had discovered more information about Louisiana pharmacy since his June 1942 article in the Journal of the American Pharmaceutical Association. The “Louisiana, Pioneer,” article discussed Governor O’Reilly’s 1770 decree separating the branches of medicine and the 1804 New Orleans city ordinance.
Cowen did not include Jean Peyroux, the holder of the first pharmacy license from a North American governing body, in this article. Cowen’s interest lay in the development of American pharmacy, so a license granted by the Spanish governing body of New Orleans to Peyroux might not have qualified as a “First” in Cowen’s mind. While Peyroux had significance in the history of American pharmacy (and reinforced the Gallic destination image of the city), he did not have a site to call his own, and he had left little historical trace outside of his license. Peyroux was not easy to grasp or visualize, while Grandchamps and Dufilho cast a longer shadow over local history and also reinforced the Gallic image.
Loyola University College of Pharmacy Professor Edward J. Ireland in his laboratory, c. 1960. Courtesy of Kremers Reference Files.
Referencing Gibson’s Guide, Cowen wrote that, “the title of first registered pharmacist in the United States must go to either “François Grandchamps, chemist and druggist, member of the Medical Society… or L. J. Dufilho… both in New Orleans.”117 He also noted that Dufilho’s pharmacie had, “been chosen for the site of a Museum of Pharmacy which Dean John F. McCloskey and Professor Edward J. Ireland of the New Orleans College of Pharmacy of Loyola University are sponsoring.”118
The second 1943 article, published in the Journal of the New Orleans College of Pharmacy, titled “A Roster of the Licensed Apothecaries of Louisiana, 1816-1847,” was an alphabetical listing of pharmacists compiled by Cowen from a variety of sources. Cowen noted the confusion in clarifying individuals and relationships within the Dufilho clan, allowing for the possibility of up to three pharmacists by the name of Dufilho.119 As for Grandchamps, Cowen mentioned that he was absent from a series of 1846 advertisements published by the Medical Board that listed licensed practitioners.120 Cowen did not appear to know that Grandchamps had died in 1842. In both entries, Cowen mentioned that Grandchamps and Dufilho share the honor of being the first licensed pharmacists in the United States.121
Loyola Commits
With the discovery of the significance of Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr., the playing field of 514-516 Chartres Street had changed dramatically. McCloskey, Ireland, and Le Grand-Crumb had an alternative identification for their building—one that allowed 500 Chartres Street to fully claim the designation (and its associated history and legends) of “Napoleon House,” while permitting 514-516 a distinct identity and personality of its own. Thus, the city had two sites with two separate identities rather than one identity shared between two locations. Further, Loyola now had a convincing reason to locate its museum at 514-516 Chartres, despite the building’s size and poor condition.
Changes needed to be made, though, before Loyola felt comfortable placing its collection at the site. First and foremost was the removal of VCC control and presence from 514-516 Chartres Street. In an unsigned and undated memo from Ireland’s personal papers, Loyola summarized what would be necessary to have in place in order to “establish one ‘Museum of Pharmacy’ in the Vieux Carré in New Orleans.”122 The rescinding of section one of city ordinance 15,303 that permitted the possession of 514-516 Chartres Street by the VCC took top priority. Loyola also wanted the creation of an historical pharmacy commission (to be comprised of nine members from a variety of relevant organizations) that would be responsible for the overall operation of the pharmacy museum. Additionally, any artifacts not designated as the property of a donor would remain the property of Loyola University and, finally, that all restoration and maintenance costs of the site be borne by the city of New Orleans.123
By the time of this memo, the significance of Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr., to the history of pharmacy had been unearthed by Cowen whose research gave crucial support and reinforcement to Loyola’s demands in regards to the property. With a tourist-minded Mayor Maestri in office, the situation suddenly seemed ripe with possibility for Loyola and Le Grand-Crumb. On December 7, 1943, New Orleans city ordinance 15,883 established the Historical Pharmacy Commission of the City of New Orleans and granted the Commission sole proprietary rights to 514-516 Charters: “said building shall not be rented or lent to or used or occupied by any other association, commission, board, official, person, firm, body or corporation.”124 The first meeting of the Historical Pharmacy Commission of the City of New Orleans soon took place on February 7, 1944.125
514-516 Chartres Street, c. late 1930s-1940. Courtesy of the Historic New Orleans Collection, accession no. 82-92-L, folder 10/15/1950.
While Loyola got what it wanted and a Historical Pharmacy Museum had been established and meetings started, little was done to the property and museum due to a change in focus during Mayor Maestri’s second administration. During his first administration, Maestri amazed the nation with his energy and determination to improve the city of New Orleans.126 In his second administration (1942-1946), however, he ceased his daily tours of the city and no longer concerned himself with running the municipal government. Suggestions have been made for this sudden lack of attention to the city of New Orleans, ranging from management of the Old Regular political machine to shifts in priorities due to World War II, which caused a shortage of building materials, hampering civic functioning, to simple boredom.127
In a 1945 letter to Mayor Maestri, Mae Le Grand-Crumb, in her self-appointed capacity as the “policeman of Chartres Street,” made a number of complaints.128 Because she wrote in the opening of her letter, “Here I am again,”129 it appears this is only one of a series of letters Le Grand-Crumb sent to the Mayor, trying to galvanize him into action. After complaining about a lack of civic services like street cleaning, she made a very pointed inquiry about the future of the property next door. According to Le Grand-Crumb, 514-516 Chartres Street had been taken over by “the bums of the French Quarter,” looking for a night’s rest and was being used as a “garbage plant.”130 As for the museum, no action had been taken by Maestri since the passing of the city ordinance 15,883 setting up the Historical Pharmacy Commission in 1943. “Do we get a museum or do we continue with this eye-sore on Chartres Street?” asked Le Grand-Crumb.131
New Mayor, New Hope
In 1946, a new mayor took office. deLesseps S. Morrison132 presented himself as a reformer opposed to Maestri’s one-man rule of New Orleans.133 When confronted with a problem, Mayor Morrison did not hesitate to call in experts for suggestions, which he often readily accepted.134 Under Morrison, road construction and maintenance again received attention, a New Orleans Recreation Department was formed, and the Greater New Orleans Expressway and Civic Center were built. Morrison managed to solicit enough business for the port to move the standing of New Orleans’ port from 17th to second in a two-year period.135
Mayor Morrison also proved to be a major promoter of the city. His vigorous press campaigns helped make the city one of the premier destination cities in the country. Morrison urged journalist friends to write stories about the city, and regularly issued bulletins that highlighted the city’s progress—all of which went a long way to drawing new tourists, business travelers, and corporate opportunities back to New Orleans.136
On December 11, 1946 Ireland sent a letter to Rev. Thomas J. Shields, S. J., President of Loyola University.137 Ireland informed Shields about a recent meeting of the Historical Pharmacy Museum with Mayor Morrison. After explaining the project to Mayor Morrison (who persisted in referring to 514-516 Chartres Street as “Napoleon House,” as late as 1949138) Morrison agreed with the Historical Pharmacy Commission that “the building at 516 Chartres Street should be remodeled immediately for the restoration of the old drug store as owned and operated by Mr. Dufilho in 1824.”139 Ireland felt the mayor “was most agreeable” due to the involvement of Loyola in the project.140
Another meeting followed in March 1947 according to a later annual report filed by Dean McCloskey.141 At this meeting, attended by the members of the Historical Pharmacy Museum, Mayor Morrison, Commissioner of Public Utilities Fred Earhart and Commissioner of Public Safety Bernard McCloskey,142 Morrisson stated that work would start soon, but that to date (December 31, 1947) no work had been completed.143 The report noted that a number of unofficial meetings had taken place between members of the Historical Pharmacy Museum and Commissioner Earhart throughout the previous year, winning a valuable ally on the City Commission Council.144
By this time, the aggressive acquisitions policy of historical pharmaceutical and medical equipment conducted by Dean McCloskey and Prof. Ireland had garnered serious returns with donations arriving on a weekly basis and occupying three basement rooms of Dean McCloskey’s house. Extra storage provided by Loyola University and an unidentified commission member did not provide enough space, McClocksey reported, and, “we are approaching the point where the available storage is no longer adequate.”145 The city spent no money in purchasing exhibits for the proposed museum, leaving any expenses related to collecting materials the responsibility of Commission members.146
While no renovations took place in 1947, the Commission stayed busy. Three Loyola staff members had been assigned to finding the family records of the Dufilho family, including possibly Charles Lester Bradley, a BS student in Pharmacy, who graduated from Loyola in June of 1948. In his bachelor’s thesis, Bradley reprinted a letter sent to him by Mrs. A. D. Jorda (maiden name, Cecile Anne Dufilho).147 In the letter, dated November 20, 1947, Jorda seemed somewhat in the dark about her ancestors, believing that her family did not arrive in New Orleans until 1816, when Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr., arrived from France to practice in the city. Jorda, the last of seven children, conveyed the unfortunate news that her collection of family papers had been destroyed by a flood fourteen years earlier in 1933.148
As a new year dawned, the Historical Pharmacy Commission hoped that the museum would open in the summer of 1948.149 In prepartion for opening on July 8, 1948, the Louisiana State Board of Pharmacy issued Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr., a brand new license, prominently numbered “001.”150 According to the placard placed next to the 1948 license, the license had been issued in recognition of L. J. Dufilho, Jr’s. place as the first United States license holder in Pharmacy.151 It is probable that Cowen’s ground-breaking work on the subject of Louisiana pharmacy and Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr., acted as the foundation for the issuance of this license.
Though the Historical Pharmacy Museum had a freshly issued license ready to go, restoration still did not begin. On March 25, 1948, McCloskey and Ireland arranged to meet with Mayor Morrison and Commissioner Earhart, concerned that work had not yet started on the museum.152 Morrison listened as McCloskey and Ireland described the many virtues of the project. Morrison seemed concerned and promised that help from the city would be forthcoming.153
City Engineer Nat Marks, a former classmate of McCloskey’s, advised the dean to begin the reconstruction as quickly as possible, “before the financial squeeze took place.”154 Marks had identified a major problem that plagued Morrison’s administration. In 1948, Earl K. Long, brother to the assassinated Huey P. Long, had taken office as Governor.155 Like his brother, Earl tried to control New Orleans from Baton Rouge. At this time, New Orleans paid approximately 25% of all taxes in the state, and in return, New Orleans only received 10% of state funds. While Governor Earl Long inherited this situation with New Orleans, relations further soured when Long decided to slash sales tax in New Orleans by 50%, further squeezing the city finances.156
On April 9, 1948, McCloskey, Ireland and Rev. J. Shields held another meeting with Mayor Morrison, attended by Commissioner of Finance, Lionel Ott, and Commissioner of Public Buildings, Fred A. Hotard. Before the meeting started, Morrison expressed his concern with the financial outlook of New Orleans and feared that the partial loss of the city’s sales taxes would entail the stoppage of many civic projects.157
Official pharmacy license issued to Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr., on July 8, 1948 from The Board of Pharmacy for the State of Louisiana. Note that the Board dated the license “May 11, 1816,” the date when Dufilho, Jr. received his license as recorded in the Registre du Comité Médical de la Nouvelle-Orléans, 1816-1854. Photo taken by author. Courtesy of the New Orleans Pharmacy Museum.
The Historical Pharmacy Commission gained a valuable ally at this meeting. Commissioner Hotard and Dean McCloskey fell into casual conversation, and discovered that, not only, did Loyola claim a nephew of Hotard’s as a student, but that Hotard also had two physician brothers and a third brother who practiced as a pharmacist.158 It appears that Hotard became a major factor in starting the renovations at 514-516 Chartres Street, particularly considering that as the Commissioner of Public Buildings, he had the power to see the renovation to completion.159
On April 13, 1948, a few days later, Commissioner Hotard made arrangements to view the site in the company of pharmacist and Historical Pharmacy Commission member, Adam Wirth. After the appointment, Wirth reported to McCloskey that “we may see repairs start at once.”160 On April 27, a conference organized under the auspices of Commissioner Hotard took place at the site. McCloskey and Ireland met with Commission of Public Buildings employees and Commissioner Earhart. The men reviewed the location floor by floor, with the intention of deciding which projects should be done first in order to get the building secure enough to start moving the collection to the site. While the second and third floors only needed reconditioning, the first floor would require major renovations including the installation of electricity, gas and water, window repairs, and the reconstruction of both the back and front doors. By July 6th, work had commenced, and the Historical Pharmacy Commission hoped (unsuccessfully) that the museum could open for business by the end of 1948.161
Attempted Land Grabs
For all of Mayor Morrison’s encouraging words, however, some individuals, like Adam Wirth felt that help from the city would not actually be forthcoming, because the project had such a strong connection to former mayor Maestri.162
The passage of New Orleans city ordinance 15,883 in December 1943, had guaranteed the Historical Pharmacy Commission full possession and control of the building without requiring the Commission to share the space.163 In 1948, Morrison attempted to impinge on the conditions of the ordinance, wanting to use the museum’s patio and driveway as parking for the Civil District Court judges and inquiring if he could place other people at the location as the city government had so little extra space.164 Dean McCloskey declared, “We will not allow the building to be used as a garage.”165 McCloskey further added that having neighbors would not be acceptable— probably influenced by memories of the VCC occupying the upper levels of the building in the early 1940s.166
Mayor Morrison again attempted to gain access to 514-516 Chartres Street the following year. On November 11, 1949, Morrison requested a meeting with McCloskey and Ireland at the pharmacy museum at 11 am.167 Due to unfortunate circumstances, the men did not meet up and Morrison toured the building at 2 pm, escorted by Le Grand-Crumb. While viewing the structure, Morrison shared his plans of placing a branch library in the building with Le Grand-Crumb, who cautiously accepted the idea. When told of the meeting by Le Grand-Crumb, McCloskey and Ireland explained the importance of keeping sole possession of the building to Le Grand-Crumb, bringing her back into conformity with the Loyola party line.168
Morrison continued to try to place a library branch at the location. On January 10, 1950, Le Grand-Crumb told Ireland that she felt the mayor still had designs on the museum for partial use as a branch library, and Ireland later discussed the matter with McCloskey. McCloskey believed that representatives from the Latter Memorial Library wanted the space because there would not be any cost in using this space, because all expenses for the building were borne by the city.169
Within a day or two, Le Grand-Crumb heard from an acquaintance, that the mayor still planned to use the two upper levels for a library.170 Members of the Historical Pharmacy Commission heard further gossip that supporters of the library who wanted space at 514-516 Chartres Street continued to urge the idea on the mayor. McCloskey wrote that “fortunately, we have diplomatically killed most of this project and hope that we can keep the pressure off long enough to get the Museum ready and all rooms occupied.”171
Why did use of this space continue to be contested? Loyola wanted to protect the space that would hold their extensive collection of 15,000 objects.172 Mayor Morrison wanted access in order to distribute a valuable piece of patronage to supporters. The Historical Pharmacy Commission wanted to succeed in its mission of opening a historical pharmacy museum in the interests of French Quarter preservation. It became a battle for control of the site between these three parties. Loyola and the Historical Pharmacy Commission made for natural allies, with Morrison the odd man out. In the end, Loyola and the Commission won out, successfully opening a historical pharmacy that reinforced the destination image of New Orleans and the French Quarter.
What’s in a Name?
The name of the museum, though, continued to be disputed. By this time, Commissioner Earhart, who had been so critical to the fortunes of 514-516 Chartres Street, had died, and his family insisted that the museum should be named in his honor.173 At the January 6, 1950 meeting of the Historical Pharmacy Commission, the name of the museum came up for discussion. Speaking on behalf of a number of members, Mr. Lucas, a Historical Pharmacy Commission member, felt the museum should be named for Earhart. McCloskey, Ireland and Le Grand-Crumb (by now a member of the Historical Pharmacy Museum174) disagreed, insisting that the museum should be named for Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr.175
A memo found in Ireland’s papers discussed several possible names for the museum: “La Pharmacie Ancienne de la Nouvelle Orleans,” “La Musee de Pharmacie,” and the “French-Spanish Historical Pharmacy.” The author noted that one of the purposes of the museum was “to present to our visitors a Pharmacy representative of the early French and Spanish background of Louisiana.”176 While these names certainly fulfilled that purpose, they did not allow for an interpretation of progress, which was one of the messages the city hoped to convey.
American museums and libraries had been focusing on the concept of “progress” since the 1870s.177 By 1940, 60 general collections (natural history, art, history) had been established along with hundreds of smaller, specialized museums.178 Unlike earlier museums, these collections no longer looked to reveal divine design to the masses, but, rather, presented objects through a prism of progress. Historian Pierre Nora described the timing of a lieux de mémoire, occurring when, “an immense and intimate fund of memory disappears.”179
When confronted with the suggestion that the museum be named for Commissioner Earhart, McCloskey later wrote that “we pointed out it should be La Pharmacie Français de Louis Dufilho because it has historical appeal, is true, exact and in keeping with the plans of the founders, Mrs. [Le Grand-]Crumb, Dr. Ireland and Dean McCloskey.”180 This name and the man honored shed subtle light on the progressive image of New Orleans, alluding to Louisiana’s historically enlightened attitude towards medicine.
Their original motives for involvement help to explain why these members embraced this name. Le Grand-Crumb, recognizing that historic preservation and the French and Spanish architecture enhanced the appeal of the Vieux Carré, wanted to restore and preserve the building next door to her business in order to draw more visitors down Chartres Street. McCloskey and Ireland hoped to highlight Louisiana’s place in pharmacy and to utilize the coincidental connections of Louis Joseph Dufiho, Jr.’s status as the first holder of a United States-issued pharmacy license, to showcase Loyola’s collection of historical pharmacy and medical equipment. A 1951 photograph of the museum’s placard displayed the name of the museum as, “La Pharmacie Française de Louis J. Dufilho.”181 Ireland, McCloskey and Le Grand-Crumb’s vision had won out.
When the Historical Pharmacy Commission committed to this name for the museum, it brought attention to Louis J. Dufilho, Jr., advertised by the museum as the “First Pharmacist.” The theme of progress is subtly intertwined with the Gallic and Creole culture that was part of the destination image of New Orleans.
François Who?
While Cowen considered both Grandchamps and Dufilho America’s first licensed pharmacists in the early 1940s, this fact began to disappear from the public record. When the museum finally opened on October 19, 1950, a number of newspaper articles heralded the opening of the long-awaited museum. In a sample of six articles, ranging in date from April 1950 to January 1951, three articles credit Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr., as the “First” pharmacist, without referring to François Grandchamps.182 One article refers to two “First” pharmacists, but only lists Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr., by name.183 Only two local papers refer to Grandchamps. In the first article, “Before Club Sandwiches And Curb Service,” Ireland carefully explained that, “Dufilho and a man named François Grandchamps were the first pharmacists to be licensed in the United States.”184 The second article,“The Editor Visits… La Pharmacie Français,” stated, without listing a source, that L. J. Dufilho, Jr., and François Grandchamps shared the honor of being “First.”185
The author of “Owners of the Building Now Occupied by the Pharmacie Français,” wrote in a section titled “Note,” that a packet had been prepared for dedication speakers to provide them with the facts of the museum for use in their speeches, but “the speakers, except the founders (Ireland, [Le Grand-]Crumb and McCloskey), did not know anything really factual about the Museum.”186
With only experts interested in the exact facts of the matter, and Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr., the focus of the museum, Grandchamps and Peyroux, faded from view. Today, Grandchamps and Peyroux appear only in specialized texts such as Kremers and Urdang’s History of Pharmacy or in Ed Reed’s obscure book, Wet Graves, Hoodoo Men and Sharp Cats: The History of Pharmacy in Louisiana from the Very Beginning. The attention on Dufilho thus helped reinforce the new destination image of New Orleans as opposed to the older sexualized and decadent image based around Storyville. Locals—and visitors—centered this image in the Vieux Carré and emphasized themes such as French and Spanish architecture, Creole-Gallic identity, and plantation life.
Conclusion
It is ironic to consider that in salvaging the past for the public, history becomes confined to a specific time and space, limiting the complexity of the stories presented to the public. A series of fortunate events led to the formation of not one but two historic sites—Napoleon House located at 500 Chartres Street and the New Orleans Pharmacy Museum at 514-516 Chartres Street. It would seem that the creation of two sites is a win-win situation for the City of New Orleans, and in a sense it is, as tourists now have a choice between two historical experiences— one that emphasizes the city’s Gallic roots, and the other a monument to Louisiana’s and New Orleans part in American progress.
Anchoring a specific history to a location can be limiting, too. With the Pharmacy Museum so strongly identified with Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr., the site and his significance overwhelms and obscures a more considered presentation of the contributions Louisiana made to American pharmacy. In obscuring these contributions, other relevant historical personalities like Peyroux and O’Reilly are forgotten from discussions of American pharmacy. François Grandchamps’ potential claim as “First” is ignored in the face of Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr.’s name being inscribed as the first apothecary granted a Louisiana State license in the Registre du Comité de la Nouvelle-Orléans, 1816-1854. This may not have had as much impact were it not for the fact that the City of New Orleans possessed Dufilho’s pharmacie, fortuitously designated as a museum space. When David L. Cowen uncovered Dufilho’s significance to American pharmacy, person-building-history coalesced, leaving Grandchamps on the sidelines.
Probably most incongruously, François Grandchamps and Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr., would not have recognized the times they lived in as viewed through the destination image New Orleans developed throughout the 1920s to 1940s. The exotic white Creole population, the happy slaves, the gracious, decadent lifestyle and quadroon balls as visualized by 20th-century viewers would have been utterly unrecognizable to the hard-working men of early National Louisiana. From 1800 to 1820, New Orleans existed in a state of tension. The city and surrounding area witnessed slave revolts, had connections to the bloody events in the Caribbean that played out between 1791 to 1810, and the 1803 Louisiana Purchase ushered in a new government and the forces of Americanization. The men of the time focused on building a state, not on enjoying moonlight and magnolias.
Prescription room exhibit at La Pharmacie Française de Louis J. Dufilho, c. 1952. Courtesy of Kremers Reference Files.
Footnotes
↵1. Laurel Dorrance, “An Examination of the Education and Licensing of Pharmacists in Early Louisiana, 1718-1816: The Significance of Louis Joseph Dufilho, Jr.,” Pharmacy in History 53 (2011): 70-82.
↵2. John Robert Moore, “The New Deal in Louisiana,” in vol. 2 of The New Deal: The State and Local Levels, edited by John Braeman, Robert H. Bremmer and David Brody (Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press, 1975), 140-41.
↵3. Anthony J. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy: New Orleans, American Culture, and the Emergence of Modern Tourism, 1915-1950” (PhD diss., Vanderbilt University, 2003), 184-85, 189-97.
↵4. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 276-76.
↵5. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 235-40, 250-53.
↵6. In 1897, Storyville became one of the first legalized red light districts in the United States. The brainchild of Councilman Sidney Story, the tenderloin district became commonly known as “Storyville,” an ironic nod to Story’s efforts to morally cleanse the city. In time, it became the most famous tenderloin district in North America. The district closed by order of the federal government in 1917. From Pamela D. Arceneaux, “Guidebooks to Sin: The Blue Books of Storyville,” The Lousiana Purchase Bicentennial Series in Louisiana History, vol. 15 of Visions and Revisions: Perspectives on Louisiana Society and Culture (Lafayette, LA: Center for Louisiana Studies, 2002), 279.
↵7. Pierre Nora, “Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Mémoire,” Representations 26 (1989): 22.
↵8. Kevin Fox Gotham, “Destination New Orleans: Commodification, Rationalization and the Rise of Urban Tourism,” Journal of Consumer Culture 7 (2007): 308.
↵9. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 55-58.
↵10. Gotham, “Destination New Orleans” (n. 8), 314.
↵11. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 108, 237-44.
↵12. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 308; Edward F. Haas, “New Orleans on the Half-Shell: The Maestri Era, 1936-1946,” Louisiana History: The Journal of the Louisiana Historical Association 13 (1972): 295.
↵13. Haas, “New Orleans on the Half-Shell” (n. 12), 295.
↵14. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 275-76.
↵15. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 312-13.
↵16. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 110.
↵17. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 130.
↵18. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 253; “Repairing Of Old Landmarks Here About Half Done,” Times-Picayune, April 25, 1936.
↵19. “Repairing of Old Landmarks Here About Half Done” (n. 18).
↵20. The LaLaurie Mansion is famous for being a site where a number of slaves had been tortured by the owner of the mansion, Madame LaLaurie. While LaLaurie’s treatment of her slaves had been the subject of rumors for a while, on April 10, 1836, the house caught fire and seven slaves were found, bound and mutilated. A mob descended on the house, severely damaging the property. Madame LaLaurie fled during the confusion, supposedly dying in France a few years later. Lafitte’s Blacksmith Shop is reputed to have housed the Lafitte’s business operations.
↵21. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 325.
↵22. Henry C. Castellanos, New Orleans As It Was: Episodes of Louisiana Life (New Orleans: L. Graham & Sons, Ltd., 1895), 148.
↵23. “The True Story of Napoleon’s House,” Times-Picayune, June 16, 1907.
↵24. Castellanos, “New Orleans As It Was” (n. 22), 147.
↵25. Castellanos, “New Orleans As It Was” (n. 22), 147.
↵26. “Famed House Is Saved For Time Being, Work Of Strengthening ‘Napoleon’ Building Against Collapse Completed By Bank” New Orleans Item, September 14, 1937.
↵27. “Famed House Is Saved For Time Being” (n. 26).
↵28. “Famed House Is Saved For Time Being” (n. 26).
↵29. “Famed House Is Saved For Time Being” (n. 26).
↵30. “Famed House Is Saved For Time Being” (n. 26).
↵31. “Famed House Is Saved For Time Being” (n. 26).
↵32. “Mecca For Tourists Is Endangered,” New Orleans Item, August 5, 1937.
↵33. “Mecca For Tourists Is Endangered,” (n. 32).
↵34. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 251-56.
↵35. “Mecca For Tourists Is Endangered,” (n. 32).
↵36. “Mecca For Tourists Is Endangered,” (n. 32).
↵37. William Boizelle to Mayor Robert Maestri, 5 August 1937, Mayor Robert S. Maestri Records, 1936 to 1945, Correspondence 1937-1938, New Orleans City Archives, New Orleans Public Library.
↵38. The signature of this unsigned letter did not survive the transfer to microfilm. In his 5 August 1937 letter to Maestri, Boizelle indicated that he had attached a copy of a different letter addressed to Le Sage to his correspondence with the Mayor. The unsigned letter is probably Boizelle’s letter to Le Sage. William Boizelle (presumed author) to Mr. L. C. Le Sage, 5 August 1937, Mayor Robert S. Maestri Records, 1936-45, Correspondence 1937-1938, New Orleans City Archives, New Orleans Public Library.
↵39. Boizelle (presumed author) to Le Sage (n. 38).
↵40. Boizelle (presumed author) to Le Sage (n. 38).
↵41. Boizelle (presumed author) to Le Sage (n. 38).
↵42. Boizelle (presumed author) to Le Sage (n. 38).
↵43. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 79-80, 135.
↵44. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3) 135-36.
↵45. Laurel Dorrance, “THNOC-Dorrance Tourism Bibliography,” 30-31, in partial fulfillment of requirements for HIST-6992, University of New Orleans, 2009, Historic New Orleans Collection, Williams Research Center.
↵46. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 272; Gotham, “Destination New Orleans” (n. 8), 319.
↵47. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 299.
↵48. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 300.
↵49. Nora, “Between Memory and History” (n. 7), 17.
↵50. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 247.
↵51. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 248.
↵52. “Start Work On Napoleon House Soon, City Paves Way for Restoration Following Purchase of Old Structure By Mayor,” New Orleans Item, September 30, 1937.
↵53. Chain of Title, Vieux Carré Survey, vol. 27 (New Orleans, LA: 1966) [No page numbers], Historic New Orleans Collection, Williams Research Center.
↵54. “Start Work on Napoleon House” (n. 52).
↵55. “Start Work on Napoleon House” (n. 52).
↵56. “Start Work on Napoleon House” (n. 52).
↵57. “Start Work on Napoleon House” (n. 52).
↵58. Stanley Clisby Arthur, Old New Orleans: A History of the Vieux Carré, Its Ancient and Historical Buildings (1936; repr., Westminster, MD: Heritage Books, 2007), 203-206.
↵59. Arthur, Old New Orleans (n. 58), 203.
↵60. Chain of Title, Vieux Carré Survey (n. 53); Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 315.
↵61. Ben Bavly, “The Historical Pharmacy Museum of New Orleans,” Historical Pharmacy Museum, undated, Loyola Special Collections, University Archives, Loyola University, New Orleans.
↵62. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 315.
↵63. Pierre Nora, “Preface to the English-Language Edition—From Lieux de mémoire to Realms of Memory,” Realms of Memory, 3-vol., http://faculty.smu.edu/bwheeler/Joan_of_Arc/OLR/03_PierreNora_Lieux-deMemoire.pdf (accessed March 15, 2011), p. xvii. “If the expression lieu de memoire must have an official definition, it should be this: a lieu de memoire is any significant entity, whether material or nonmaterial in nature, which by dint of human will or the work of time has become a symbolic element of the memorial heritage of any community (in this case, the French community).”
↵64. “Plan Speed On Napoleon House Work,” New Orleans Item, October 1, 1937; “Chartres Returns To Its Glory,” New Orleans Item, October 31, 1937.
↵65. William Boizelle to Mr. Louis C. Le Sage, 21 May 1938, Mayor Robert S. Maestri Records, 1936-1945, Correspondence 1937-1938, New Orleans City Archives, New Orleans Public Library.
↵66. “Famed House,” (n. 26).
↵67. “Start Work on Napoleon House” (n. 52).
↵68. Frank A. March to Honorable Paul H. Murphy [with attachment], 30 March 1939, Mayor Robert S. Maestri Records, 1936-1945, WPA (Box Six), New Orleans City Archives, New Orleans Public Library.
↵69. March to Murphy (n. 68).
↵70. March to Murphy (n. 68).
↵71. March to Murphy (n. 68).
↵72. Dorrance, “THNOC-Dorrance Tourism Bibliography” (n. 45), 24.
↵73. Dorrance, “THNOC-Dorrance Tourism Bibliography” (n. 45), 24.
↵74. “Old-Time Pharmacy To Become Museum,” New Orleans Item, August 28, 1948.
↵75. “Owners of the Building Now Occupied by the Pharmacie Français,” 1950, [No page numbers], Pharmacy Museum Records, Historic New Orleans Collection, Williams Research Center.
↵76. Roosevelt Hotel, “The Editor Visits… La Pharmacie Francaise,” Roosevelt Review, 14 (1951): 29.
↵77. Miriam R. Levin, “Museums & the Democratic Order,” The Wilson Quarterly, 26 (2002): 59.
↵78. Nora, “Between Memory and History” (n. 7), 15.
↵79. Nora, “Between Memory and History” (n. 7), 15.
↵80. “Historical Pharmacy Museum Report to Loyola Museum—June 30, 1949 to August 1, 1950,” 2, Pharmacy Museum Records, Historic New Orleans Collection, Williams Research Center.
↵81. A show globe acted as a symbol of identification, permitting illiterate passer-by to be able to know the shop as a pharmacy. These globes also allowed the pharmacist to show off his skills with chemicals. Pharmacists would fashion their globes using different densities of colored liquids, creating a striped effect in the globe. Sonderlund Pharmacy Museum, “Show Globes Page,” Drugstore Museum Sponsored by Sonderlund Village Drug, http://drugstoremuseum.com/index.php (accessed March 30, 2011).
↵82. I. L. Lyons to John McCloskey, November 20, 1934, Pharmacy Museum Records, Historic New Orleans Collection, Williams Research Center.
↵83. John F. McCloskey to Mr. L. G. Butler, November 26, 1934, Pharmacy Museum Records, Historic New Orleans Collection, Williams Research Center. Subsequent letters are not in the collection, so it is unclear if Butler donated the show globe.
↵84. Townes R. Leigh to Dr. Edward J. Ireland, January 22, 1936, Pharmacy Museum Records, Historic New Orleans Collection, Williams Research Center; John F. McCloskey, “The Larrieu Pharmacy,” 3, Pharmacy Museum Records, Historic New Orleans Collection, Williams Research Center.
↵85. Roosevelt Hotel, “The Editor Visits” (n. 76), 29.
↵86. “Pharmacy of Yesteryear in Museum,” New Orleans States, February 9, 1941.
↵87. Roosevelt Hotel, “The Editor Visits” (n. 76); McCloskey, “The Larrieu Pharmacy” (n. 84), 3.
↵88. R. L. Polk and Co., City Directory for New Orleans, 1942 (R. L. Polk and Co., New Orleans, LA.), 265.
↵89. Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 235.
↵90. “Le Petit Theatre de Vieux Carré,” Times-Picayune, November 16, 1922; “Jazz Ballet Here Rivals New York,” Times-Picayune, March 7, 1926; Anthony Stanonis, “A Woman of Boundless Energy: Elizabeth Werlein and Her Times,” Louisiana History: The Journal of the Louisiana Historical Association, 46 (2005): 16.
↵91. “Beauregard Ball Planned To Raise Cash For Old Home Restoration,” Times-Picayune, December 15, 1940.
↵92. Polk, New Orleans City Directory (n. 88), 265.
↵93. “Old Building To Be Restored,” New Orleans Item, October 28, 1937.
↵94. McCloskey, “The Larrieu Pharmacy” (n. 84), 3.
↵95. McCloskey, “The Larrieu Pharmacy” (n. 84), 2.
↵96. McCloskey, “The Larrieu Pharmacy” (n. 84), 2.
↵97. McCloskey, “The Larrieu Pharmacy” (n. 84), 3.
↵98. McCloskey, “The Larrieu Pharmacy” (n. 84), 2-3.
↵99. John F. McCloskey, “The Larrieu Pharmacy Story in April 1941,” 21 June 1941, 2, Pharmacy Museum Records, Historic New Orleans Collection, Williams Research Center.
↵100. McCloskey, “The Larrieu Pharmacy” (n. 84), 2.
↵101. New Orleans City Ordinance 15,303, 20 May 1941 (New Orleans City Council City Ordinances, 1928-1950, New Orleans City Archives, New Orleans Public Library).
↵102. New Orleans City Ordinance 15,303 (n. 101), Section one.
↵103. New Orleans City Ordinance 15,303 (n. 101), Section four.
↵104. McCloskey, “The Larrieu Pharmacy” (n. 84), 1.
↵105. Rutgers University, “Rutgers Professor Emeritus David L. Cowen, Distinguished Historian of Pharmacy, Dead at 96,” Rutgers University, http://news.rutgers.edu/medrel/news-releases/2006/04/rutgers-professor-em-20060418 (accessed March 16, 2011).
↵106. David L. Cowen, “A Roster of the Licensed Apothecaries of Louisiana, 1816-1847,” Journal of the New Orleans College of Pharmacy, 8, no. 2 (1943): 1.
↵107. David L. Cowen, “America’s First Pharmacy Laws, Part One,” Journal of the American Pharmaceutical Association, 3 (May 1942): 162-68.
↵108. Cowen, “America’s First Pharmacy Laws” (n. 107), 162-64.
↵109. Cowen, “America’s First Pharmacy Laws” (n. 107), 164.
↵110. Cowen, “America’s First Pharmacy Laws” (n. 107), 169.
↵111. David L. Cowen, “America’s First Pharmacy Laws, Part Two,” Journal of the American Pharmaceutical Association, 3 (June 1942): 2.
↵112. John Gibson, 1838 Gibson’s Guide and Directory of the State of Louisiana, and the Cities of New Orleans and Lafayette, (New Orleans, LA: 1838), 268-70.
↵113. Cowen, “America’s First Pharmacy Laws, Part Two” (n. 111), 214; Cowen, “A Roster of the Licensed Apothecaries of Louisiana” (n. 106), 3; Gibson’s Guide and Directory (n. 111), 270.
↵114. Cowen, “America’s First Pharmacy Laws, Part Two” (n. 111), 214; David L Cowen, “History of Pharmacy and the History of the South,” Apothecary’s Cabinet— News and Notes from the American Institute of the History of Pharmacy, no. 6 (2003): 4.
↵115. Bavly, “The Historical Pharmacy Museum of New Orleans, (n. 61), [No page numbers].
↵116. Cowen, “America’s First Pharmacy Laws, Part Two” (n. 111), 214; Cowen, “A Roster of the Licensed Apothecaries of Louisiana” (n. 106); David L. Cowen, “Louisiana Pioneer in Regulation of Pharmacy,” Louisiana Historical Society 2 (1943): 336.
↵117. Cowen, “Louisiana Pioneer in Regulation of Pharmacy” (n. 116), 336.
↵118. Cowen, “Louisiana Pioneer in Regulation of Pharmacy” (n. 116), 337
↵119. Cowen, “A Roster of the Licensed Apothecaries of Louisiana” (n. 106), 3.
↵120. Cowen, “A Roster of the Licensed Apothecaries of Louisiana” (n. 106), 3.
↵121. Cowen, “A Roster of the Licensed Apothecaries of Louisiana” (n. 106), 3.
↵122. “Things Which Must be Accomplished to Establish One ‘Museum of Pharmacy’ in the Vieux Carré,” 1, Pharmacy Museum Records, Historic New Orleans Collection, Williams Research Center.
↵123. “Things Which Must be Accomplished,” (n. 122), 1-2.
↵124. New Orleans City Ordinance 15,883, 7 December 1944 (New Orleans City Council City Ordinances, 1928-1950, New Orleans City Archives, New Orleans Public Library).
↵125. Marion McClure to Dr. Edward J. Ireland, 5 February 1944, Pharmacy Museum Records, Historic New Orleans Collection, Williams Research Center.
↵126. Haas, “New Orleans on the Half-Shell” (n. 12), 295; Michael L. Kurtz, “deLesseps S. Morrison: Political Reformer,” Louisiana History: The Journal of the Louisiana Historical Association, 17 (1976): 25-26; Stanonis, “Creating the Big Easy” (n. 3), 307-08.
↵127. Haas, “New Orleans on the Half-Shell” (n.11), 303-304.
↵128. Mrs. Mae Le Grand-Crumb to Mayor Robert Maestri, 10 August 1945, Pharmacy Museum Records, Historic New Orleans Collection, Williams Research Center.
↵129. Le Grand-Crumb to Maestri (n. 128).
↵130. Le Grand-Crumb to Maestri (n. 128).
↵131. Le Grand-Crumb to Maestri (n. 128).
↵132. This is the correct spelling, with a lower-case “d” for delesseps.
↵133. Kurtz, “deLesseps S. Morrison” (n. 126), 19.
↵134. Kurtz, “deLesseps S. Morrison” (n. 126), 36.
↵135. Kurtz, “deLesseps S. Morrison” (n. 126), 37.
↵136. Kurtz, “deLesseps S. Morrison” (n. 126), 19, 37.
↵137. Dr. Edward J. Ireland to Rev. Thomas J. Shields, S. J., 11 December 1946, Loyola Special Collections, University Archives, Loyola University, New Orleans.
↵138. Mayor deLesseps S. Morrison to Dr. Edward J. Ireland, 26 January 1949, Records of the City Council Members, Lionel G. Ott, Pharmacy Museum (Box 13), New Orleans City Archives, New Orleans Public Library.
↵139. Ireland to Shields (n. 137).
↵140. Ireland to Shields (n. 137).
↵141. John F. McCloskey, “Annual Report, Historic Pharmacy Commission, City of New Orleans, January 1, 1947 to December 31, 1947,” 1, Pharmacy Museum Records, Historic New Orleans Collection, Williams Research Center.
↵142. No relation to Dean McCloskey.
↵143. McCloskey, “Annual Report, Historic Pharmacy Commission” (n. 141), 1.
↵144. McCloskey, “Annual Report, Historic Pharmacy Commission” (n. 141), 1.
↵145. McCloskey, “Annual Report, Historic Pharmacy Commission” (n. 141), 2.
↵146. McCloskey, “Annual Report, Historic Pharmacy Commission” (n. 141), 3.
↵147. Charles Lester Bradley, “A History of the Dufilho Family and Their Relation to Pharmacy” (bachelor’s thesis, Loyola University, 1948), 15-16.
↵148. Bradley, “A History of the Dufilho Family (n. 147), 15-16.
↵149. Bradley, “A History of the Dufilho Family (n. 147), 4.
↵150. “Exhibit of Licensing,” New Orleans Pharmacy Museum, February 23, 2011.
↵151. “Exhibit of Licensing” (n. 150).
↵152. John F. McCloskey, “1948 Summary of Activities,” 1, Pharmacy Museum Records, Historic New Orleans Collection, Williams Research Center.
↵153. McCloskey, “1948 Summary of Activities” (n. 152), 1.
↵154. McCloskey, “1948 Summary of Activities” (n. 152), 1.
↵155. Michael L. Kurtz, “Earl Long’s Political Relations with the City of New Orleans, 1948-1960,” Louisiana History: The Journal of the Louisiana Historical Association, 10 (1969): 244.
↵156. Kurtz, “Earl Long” (n. 155), 245.
↵157. McCloskey, “1948 Summary of Activities” (n. 152), 2.
↵158. McCloskey, “1948 Summary of Activities” (n. 152), 3.
↵159. McCloskey, “1948 Summary of Activities” (n. 152), 3.
↵160. McCloskey, “1948 Summary of Activities” (n. 152), 3.
↵161. McCloskey, “1948 Summary of Activities” (n. 152), 6-7.
↵162. McCloskey, “1948 Summary of Activities” (n. 152), 3.
↵163. New Orleans City Ordinance 15,883 (n. 124), Section six.
↵164. McCloskey, “1948 Summary of Activities” (n. 152), 3-4.
↵165. McCloskey, “1948 Summary of Activities” (n. 152), 3.
↵166. McCloskey, “1948 Summary of Activities” (n. 152), 4.
↵167. John F. McCloskey, “Historical Pharmacy Museum Report to Loyola University, June 30, 1949 to August 1, 1950,” 2, Pharmacy Museum Papers, Historic New Orleans Collection, Williams Research Center.
↵168. McCloskey, “Historical Pharmacy Museum Report to Loyola University” (n. 167), 2.
↵169. McCloskey, “Historical Pharmacy Museum Report to Loyola University” (n. 167), 5.
↵170. McCloskey, “Historical Pharmacy Museum Report to Loyola University” (n. 167), 6.
↵171. McCloskey, “Historical Pharmacy Museum Report to Loyola University” (n. 167), 7.
↵172. McCloskey, “1948 Summary of Activities” (n. 152), 2.
↵173. McCloskey, “Historical Pharmacy Museum Report to Loyola University” (n. 167), 4-7.
↵174. McCloskey, “1948 Summary of Activities” (n. 152), 1.
↵175. McCloskey, “Historical Pharmacy Museum Report to Loyola University” (n. 167), 3.
↵176. “Owners of the Building Now Occupied by the Pharmacie Français” (n. 75).
↵177. Levin, “Museums & the Democratic Order” (n. 77), 57.
↵178. Levin, “Museums & the Democratic Order” (n. 77), 58.
↵179. Nora, “Lieux de Mémoire” (n. 63), 11-12.
↵180. McCloskey, “Historical Pharmacy Museum Report to Loyola University” (n. 167).
↵181. Roosevelt Hotel, “The Editor Visits” (n. 76), 26.
↵182. “Old Drugs and Potions Back on Shelf—in Early Pharmacy,” Times-Picayune, October 15, 1950; “State Museum of Pharmacy is Dedicated,” New Orleans States, October 20, 1950; “Pharmaceutical Museum of Louisiana Is Dedicated,” Times-Picayune, October 20, 1950.
↵183. “Thomas Sancton—Old Drug Stores,” New Orleans Item, October, 1950, Pharmacy Museum Records, Historic New Orleans Collection, Williams Research Center.
↵184. “Before Club Sandwiches And Curb Service,” New Orleans State Magazine, April 16, 1950.
↵185. Roosevelt Hotel, “The Editor Visits” (n. 76), 28.
↵186. “Owners of the Building Now Occupied by the Pharmacie Français” (n. 75).