On May 13, 1993 fire destroyed the Manoir Montmorency. Firstconstructed as Governor Haldimand's summer residence more than two centuries before, it had been considerably transformed over the years but had always remained one of the best known and loved landmarks in the Quebec City area.
A little more than a year after the fire a ceremony took place, on June 23, 1994, to celebrate the reconstruction of the building. Only a ten-minute drive from Quebec's historic district, and situated at the top of a cliff beside the spectacular Montmorency Falls, the house and its surrounding park are presently the object of investments involving many millions of dollars. These investment are being made on what can be considered to be one of the most important historic and natural sites in Canada. To what extent, however, is the authenticity of the site compromised because its main building is now a reconstruction rather than the original edifice? Because of the scale of the project and the questions which arise from the decision to reconstruct the Manoir Montmorency, this site should be of particular interest to those considering the subject of cultural tourism and the evolution of historic sites over time.
Ever since the 1780s the Manoir Montmorency had been inextricably associated with the Montmorency Falls. For the surrounding population the building had always evoked the idea of an elegant country house, located in a spectacular setting. As is often the case when such an important and familiar edifice is suddenly destroyed, the people of the Quebec City region felt such a sense of loss that there was great pressure to reconstruct the building as closely as possible to the original. But can the original spirit of a site be conserved when one of its main elements has been irreparably damaged, or destroyed ? What should we do when an historic building is lost due to fire, war, natural disaster, or simply collapses due to age and neglect? Should we construct a new building, reflecting the aesthetics and construction techniques of our own time, or is it sometimes advisable to reconstruct the building which has disappeared?
In 1780-1781 Sir Frederick Haldimand, Governor and Commander of the British forces in the Province of Quebec, constructed a villa on a dramatic site beside the Montmorency Falls. The remarkable waterfall, cascading down 83 meters (33.5 meters higher than Niagara Falls), provided an ideal setting for a secondary residence for the Governor. Like other 18th century aristocrats, he chose to build a summer retreat on a picturesque site where he could enjoy constant contact with the beauty of nature. The views of the St. Lawrence River, the Island of Orleans and the surrounding landscape were magnificent. But also, beside this waterfall, the governor could gaze upon the awesome power of nature. A search or the "sublime" was a central part of the 18th-century attraction to the countryside.
Governor Haldimand's residence was designed in the Palladian manner, with a central building flanked by pavilions. Square, or slightly rectangular in plan, the main building was two storeys high. The first and second stories were surrounded by covered galleries to provide protected vantage points from which to enjoy the splendid views afforded by the location of the house. A low-pitched hipped roof, with a dormer windows projecting from each of its four sides, extended out beyond the walls of the residence to cover the galleries below. Open passageways led to the two square pavilions flanking the main building.
The architecture of the house was unlike that of any building constructed in the area before. On the other hand, Governor Haldimand's villa corresponded very well with architectural norms which had been established in more southerly climes. In Louisiana for example, with its hot and humid climate, it had been common for 18th century French buildings to be surrounded by galleries. Governor Haldimand's summer residence by the Montmorency Falls was, however, the first such building to be built in the northern part of the former New France. Indeed, it is probable that the later development of the typical 19th century Quebec farm house, with its curving roof extending out over a covered gallery, had its origin with the model provided by this residence built for a representative of the King of England. Perhaps inspired by traditional architecture in India, military officers serving with the British army in southern parts of the Empire had often adopted the use of covered galleries in the colonial architecture that they built. In fact, the American architectural historian Budford Pickens has shown that, while in Pensacola Florida, Sir Frederick Haldimand had built garrison buildings surrounded by covered galleries very similar to those he was to later include in his summer residence near Quebec.
Governor Haldimand remained owner of the villa until his death in 1791. The property was then put up for sale. Rather than being sold, however, the house was rented to a very illustrious tenant: Prince Edward Augustus, the fourth son of George III. Prince Edward, later the Duke of Kent, lived in the residence with his companion, Madame de Saint Laurent, until 1794. Years later, in 1818, the Prince was obliged to assure the succession to the throne by leaving Madame de Saint Laurent so that he could marry the Princess of Leiningen. The new couple were to be the father and mother of Queen Victoria.
After the departure of the Prince from Quebec in 1794, ownership of the Manoir Montmorency changed a number of times. Then, in 1815, the lumber merchant Peter Patterson acquired the site so that he could harness the power of the falls to establish what was described at the time as the largest sawmill operation in the world. Patterson, however, chose not to live in the house by the falls and it was left in a semi-abandoned state. In 1851 Patterson's daughter Mary Jane, and her husband, George Benson Hall, inherited the property. They made the house their principal residence and decided to enlarge the central building, removing the galleries which had surrounded it. The pavilions eventually disappeared as well. The modifications brought the house into line with the Neo-classical movement which was fashionable at the time when the couple transformed the residence.
In 1877 the site was sold to the Quebec Railway Light and Power Company. The falls were now used to provide electric power. On September 29, 1885, before an audience of 20,000 people, Quebec City's Dufferin Terrace was suddenly lit up by 34 electric lamps powered by electricity generated by the Montmorency Falls, situated 11.7 km away. This was the longest distance that electric power had ever been transported up until that time. The Quebec Railway Light and Power Company transformed the house by the falls into a hotel, which they named Kent House, in honour of the Duke of Kent who had resided there in the 1790s. It was also during this period, in an effort to create a prestigious image for the hotel, that the building came to be referred to as a "Manoir," even though it had never actually served as the manor house of a Seigneury. The architects Staveley & Staveley were hired to make a series of modifications and enlargements of the building in 1901, 1909-1910, and 1941-1942. Their additions included the installation of new galleries surrounding the building. The work carried out by the Staveley firm gave the edifice an American Neo-colonial character.
In 1954 the property was sold to the Dominican Fathers who operated a centre for meetings and symposiums there until 1974 when the Government of Quebec acquired the site and transformed the building into a hotel for senior citizens.
In 1992 the Sépaq (Société des établissements de plein air de Québec) the governmental organization responsible for administering the property, announced a project involving investments of over 15.3 million dollars to transform the Montmorency Falls Park into a major recreational site. The first phase of the project included the addition of such elements as a foot bridge over the falls, the construction of belvederes, a panoramic staircase, parking facilities, landscaping, the installation of a gondola to take visitors to the top of the cliff, and the removal of electric wires and other structures that had blocked the view. The Manoir Montmorency was to be restored and converted from a hotel to a centre for meetings and receptions. Just when the vast undertaking was nearing completion the Manoir Montmorency was tragically destroyed by fire.
Shortly after the conflagration, architectural historian Luc Noppen wrote a report recommending that the building be reconstructed. As this report played an important role in the decision-making process which led to the reconstruction, it is worthwhile to briefly outline some of its main points.The report stated that, while considered an historic monument by the general public, the Manoir Montmorency was not officially designated as such. Moreover, the transformations that the building had undergone over the years had almost completely hidden Governor Haldimand's original summer residence. Nevertheless, the almost constant use of the house as a villa, or country house, and then as a resort hotel, had always maintained the link between the Manoir Montmorency and its picturesque site. This continuity had given the building an importance that transcended its architectural characteristics.
To support his proposal that the building be reconstructed, Professor Noppen cited important examples of reconstructions of historic monuments, from the Campanile in St. Mark's Square in Venice, to the reconstruction of the historic heart of Warsaw after the Second World War, to the reconstruction of Notre-Dame-de-Québec after the cathedral was destroyed by fire in 1922. Noppen's report also referred to other reconstruction projects undertaken in the Province of Québec.
An important aspect of the report was Professor Noppen's recommendation that those responsible for the reconstruction should not necessarily attempt to reproduce every minute detail of the lost building. It was far more important to re-establish the overall image of the Manoir Montmorency while making slight adaptations, where necessary, to conform to current building codes and to better meet the future functional requirements of the building. It would have been extremely difficult, if not impossible, to create an exact reconstruction of the building as it might have looked in the 18th or 19th centuries. Furthermore, such an approach would not have been practical, considering the planned future use of the Manoir Montmorency as meeting and reception centre. With dining and reception areas offering superb views of the surrounding countryside, the proposed facility would be compatible with the history of the building as a country house, and then as a resort hotel. Revenues from the activities which were to take place in the reconstructed Manoir Montmorency would help to assure the survival of the building and its upkeep in the future.
The report also called, however, for efforts to be made to save what remained of the original stone walls of the Haldimand villa. As had been originally decided for the restoration project which preceded the fire, the treatment of wall surfaces should make visible the location of the 18th century villa in relation to the successive additions which had followed. The reconstructed Manoir Montmorency would thus surround and protect these vestiges, as a jewel box would protect some rare and precious object.
Once the decision to reconstruct had been made, the architects D'Anjou Bernard & Mercier, the firm that had been responsible for the restoration prior to the fire, were called upon to draw up plans to rebuild the Manoir Montmorency. Given that the program to create a meeting and reception centre remained the same they were able to proceed quite rapidly.
The objective was to create a reconstruction that was close enough to the appearance of the original building to give the impression that the fire had never taken place. For practical reasons there would be certain modifications, but these would not be evident to the casual observer. The architects wanted to give the building the feeling of a country residence, in keeping with the atmosphere which the architects Staveley & Staveley had striven to maintain in the Kent House Hotel during the first decades of the 20th century.
One major change was the enlargement of the Kent Room. While not quite large enough for the needs of the meeting and reception centre which had been planned for the Manoir Montmorency it had been decided not to change the dimensions of the room in order to respect the integrity of the historic building. After the edifice was destroyed by fire, however, the decision was made to enlarge the room so that it could accommodate 200 people instead of 150 as had originally been the case. This was accomplished by changing the orientation of the room, extending it by means of a large bay window one side, and by recuperating space from an inner courtyard on the other.
In the end the stone walls of the Haldimand villa were not conserved. With the successive enlargements that had occurred over the years the rhythm of the fenestration had become somewhat uneven. Two false windows had been painted to disguise stone walls behind them. To facilitate the organization and decoration of the rooms inside it was decided to place the window openings of the new building in a more regular fashion, with even spaces between them.
The reconstructed Manoir Montmorency was to be a completely new edifice with a steel structure within. As this was no longer a restoration project the National Building Code imposed requirements which had not been applicable before the fire. In order to accommodate required sprinkler and ventilation systems it was necessary to increase the space between the ground floor ceiling and the first floor by 30 cm. The building was thus made slightly higher than it had originally been and, to keep the proper proportions, pedestals where placed under the columns of gallery surrounding the ground floor. A subtle change was also made on the first floor. In order to slightly enlarge the reception rooms on that level the width of the central corridor was diminished by 46 cm.
Even though the original stone walls were not kept, great pains were nevertheless taken to make reference to them in the reconstruction. During the restoration work before the fire, vinyl siding had been removed to reveal two types of wood covering on the exterior walls. Additions made to the building during the early 20th century had been covered with clapboard. The 19th century boards covering the walls of the central block, however, had been given a slightly different treatment. They were placed flush against one another, creating an even, smooth, surface, as opposed to the slight overhang which characterized the clapboard covering. In the reconstruction this difference was respected. The appearance of the original stone walls of the country house is evoked both in terms of their location and thickness. The exterior and interior surfaces of the walls which correspond with the villa (as it appeared when it was the Patterson Hall residence) are covered with the smooth wooden planks, painted a sober cream colour. The visitor can thus visually grasp the location of the earlier private residence in relation to the enlarged building of today.
The appearance of the interior decoration is quite close to that of the interior before the fire. For budgetary reasons it was decided to purchase commercially available mouldings, similar to the originals, rather than going to the extent of reproducing each moulding exactly. The newel post at the base of the main staircase, however, is not a reproduction. Although somewhat charred by the flames it was restored and used in the reconstruction. The majority of theIonic columns of the ground floor gallery also survived the fire and were used again when the Manoir Montmorency was rebuilt.
The completed building now offers a restaurant with an outdoor terrace, seven reception rooms, three boutiques, and an excellent historical interpretation centre which tells the story of the Manoir Montmorency and its site over the centuries. A boardwalk now also leads from the building along the edge of the cliff to a belvedere overlooking the falls and to the foot bridge. This second phase of construction involved an investment of six million dollars, 4.8 million dollars of which was devoted to the reconstruction of the Manoir.
The authenticity of the historic and natural site that constitute the Manoir Montmorency and its surrounding Park has, of course, been diminished by the loss of the original building. I think we can say, however, that despite the modifications described above, the reconstruction is successful in that the present building corresponds quite closely with the general appearance of the edifice before the fire.
What do people seek when they visit historic sites and buildings? Many, I believe are looking for a much needed sense of continuity. Historic sites and buildings are witnesses to the passage of time, serving as landmarks, as points of reference, in a world where everything is constantly changing at an ever increasing pace. While few authentic elements of the historic Manoir Montmorency remain, the image of a country house in a magnificent natural setting has been conserved. To a large extent, the spirit or essence of the site has been re-established and strengthened despite the tragic loss of the building in the fire of 1993.
I would like to end, however, with a note of caution. There may still remain a threat to the integrity of the site. Last year, over 530,000 people visited the Montmorency Falls Parks over a period of 116 days. Publicity regarding the Park directs visitors to begin their visit at the base of the falls. While the park area around the Manoir Montmorency has kept its natural beauty, parts of the main reception area at the bottom of the cliff are far less attractive. Neither the huge parking lot nor the cold architecture of the steel, concrete and glass building from which the gondola departs, have enhanced the site. Like other popular tourist destinations, the Montmorency Falls will face increasing pressures due to its success.
David Mendel is Vice-President of Les Visites culturelles Baillargé Inc./Bailargé Cultural Tours Inc., in Quebec City.
Bibliography
A good deal of research has been done on history of the villas of Quebec, and on the Manoir Montmorency. Much of the historical information regarding the Manoir in this article was drawn from the work of France Gagnon Pratte and other architectural historians who began working on the subject while doing graduate studies at Laval University at the end of the 1970s.
Gagnon Pratte, France, Madeleine Gobeil, and Robert Jacques. "Le Manoir Montmorency". Unpublished research report, 1977.
Gagnon Pratte, France. L'Architecture et la nature à Québec au XIXe siècle : les villas. Québec: Ministère des Affaires culturelles, Musée du Québec, 1980.
Gagnon Pratte, France. "Une Maison Palladienne". HISTO'ART : Revue de la société d'art et d'histoire de Beauport. Dossier : Le Manoir Montmorency. No 5. May 1994 pp. 7-9.
Noppen, Luc. "Le Manoir Montmorency : problématique de la reconstruction". Unpublished report. 1 June 1993.
Paulette, Claude, and Michel Gaumond. Le Sault de Montmorency. Québec : Société des établissements de plein air du Québec, 1993.
Salomon de Frieberg, Barbara. "Les Résidents de la Manoir Montmorency" HISTO'ART : Revue de la société d'art et d'histoire de Beauport. Dossier : Le Manoir Montmorency. No 5. May 1994. pp.10-13.
Unpublished documents from the Sépaq (Société des établissents de plein air du Québec) :
"Démarrage de la deuxième phase de mise en valeur du Parc de la Chute Montmorency". Press release. January 25, 1993 .
"La mise en valeur du Parc de la Chute-Montmorency Phase II : Rapport préliminaire. Rapport préliminaire". June 20, 1994.
"Mise en valeur du Parc de la Chute-Montmorency: Document d'orientation". October 1993.
"Ouverture du nouveau Manoir Montmorency". Press release. June 23, 1994.
Oral sources:
Interview at the Manoir Montmorency with Pierre d'Anjou, architect, on June 28, 1994.