Cane River Creole National Historical Park

Magnolia Plantation

Overseer’s House

Historic Structure Report

Hartrampf, Inc.

and

The Office of Jack Pyburn, Architect, Inc.

for

Historical Architecture, Cultural Resources Division

Southeast Regional Office

National Park Service

2004
Cultural Resources

Southeast Region

National Park Service

100 Alabama St. SW

Atlanta, GA 30303

(404) 562-3117

The historic structure report presented here exists in two 

formats. A traditional, printed version is available for study 

at the park, the Southeastern Regional Office of the NPS 

(SERO), and at a variety of other repositories. For more 

widespread access, the historic structure report also exists 

in a web- based format through ParkNet, the website of the 

National Park Service. Please visit www.nps.gov for more 

information.

2004

Historic Structure Report

Overseer’s House

Magnolia Plantation

Cane River Creole National Historical Park

Natchez, LA

LCS#: 091558

Cover page: photo taken in 2003


Table of Contents

National Park Service v

Foreword............................................................................................................................................ vii

Project Team ...................................................................................................................................... ix

Preface ...................................................................................................................................................................................... xi

Management Summary

Historical Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1

Architectural Summary ....................................................................................................................... 2

Exterior Conditions ......................................................................................................................................................3

Interior Conditions.......................................................................................................................................................3

Summary of National Park Service Work....................................................................................................................4

Summary of Recommended Treatments ....................................................................................................................5

Administrative Data............................................................................................................................ 7

Locational Data ............................................................................................................................................................7

Related Studies.............................................................................................................................................................7

Cultural Resource Data ................................................................................................................................................7

Historical Background and Context

Antebellum Magnolia......................................................................................................................... 9

The Civil War ..................................................................................................................................... 11

Reconstruction .................................................................................................................................. 11

20th Century Magnolia..................................................................................................................... 13

Chronology of Development and Use

Original Building............................................................................................................................... 17

Early Changes.................................................................................................................................... 19

20th Century Changes ...................................................................................................................... 24

Evolution of the Main Roof Structure ............................................................................................. 26

Physical Description

Use ..................................................................................................................................................... 28

Structural System .............................................................................................................................. 32

Foundation .................................................................................................................................................................32

Chimneys ....................................................................................................................................................................33

Floor Framing .............................................................................................................................................................37

Wall Framing ..............................................................................................................................................................39
vi Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Roof Framing..............................................................................................................................................................40

Exterior Finish Materials and Characteristics ...................................................................................42

Gallery.........................................................................................................................................................................42

....................................................................................................................................................................................43

Wall Finishes...............................................................................................................................................................43

Roofing.......................................................................................................................................................................45

Doors ..................................................................................................................................................46

Windows ............................................................................................................................................61

Interior Finish Materials and Characteristics....................................................................................69

Room 101....................................................................................................................................................................69

Room 102....................................................................................................................................................................70

Room 103....................................................................................................................................................................71

Room 104....................................................................................................................................................................72

Room 105....................................................................................................................................................................73

Room 106....................................................................................................................................................................74

Room 107....................................................................................................................................................................75

Room 108....................................................................................................................................................................75

Room 109....................................................................................................................................................................76

Room 110....................................................................................................................................................................76

Room 111....................................................................................................................................................................77

Attic ............................................................................................................................................................................78

Structural Evaluation .................................................................................................................................................78

Summary of Materials Analysis.........................................................................................................79

Exterior .......................................................................................................................................................................80

Interior........................................................................................................................................................................80

Treatment and Use

Exterior Conditions............................................................................................................................82

Interior Conditions ............................................................................................................................83

Requirements for Treatment and Use..............................................................................................84

Applicable Laws .........................................................................................................................................................84

Functional Requirements...........................................................................................................................................84

Human Safety.............................................................................................................................................................85

Fire Protection............................................................................................................................................................85

Energy Conservation..................................................................................................................................................86

Abatement of Hazardous Materials .........................................................................................................................86

Handicapped Accessibility .........................................................................................................................................86

Alternatives for Treatment and Use.................................................................................................87

Ultimate Treatment and Use ............................................................................................................88

Recommendations

Site ..............................................................................................................................................................................89

Foundations................................................................................................................................................................89

Structure.....................................................................................................................................................................89

Chimneys ....................................................................................................................................................................90

Roofing.......................................................................................................................................................................90

Gallery.........................................................................................................................................................................90

Doors...........................................................................................................................................................................90

Windows and Shutters...............................................................................................................................................91

Exterior Wall Finishes.................................................................................................................................................91

Ceilings .......................................................................................................................................................................92

Interior Walls..............................................................................................................................................................92

Interior Flooring.........................................................................................................................................................92

Fireplaces....................................................................................................................................................................93

Electrical Power and Lighting ...................................................................................................................................93

Gas Service..................................................................................................................................................................93

Handicapped Accessibility .........................................................................................................................................93

Bibliography
National Park Service vii

We are pleased to make available this historic structure report, part of our ongoing effort to provide 

comprehensive documentation for the historic structures and landscapes of National Park Service units in 

the Southeast Region. We hope that this study will prove valuable to park management in their continuing 

preservation of the building and to everyone in understanding and interpreting the Overseer’s House at 

Magnolia Plantation.

Dan Scheidt

Chief, Cultural Resources Stewardship

Southeast Regional Office

May 2004

Foreword
viii Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR
National Park Service ix

Hartrampf, Inc.

Project Manager Robert A. Bass, P. E.

President

Hartrampf, Inc.

Historical Writer and

Project Coordinator

Deborah Harvey

Structural Engineer Chau Tran, P. E.

The Office of Jack Pyburn, 

Architect, Inc.

Historical Architect Jack Pyburn, AIA

President

Office of Jack Pyburn, Inc.

Preservation Planner and

Architectural Historian

Jackie Renell

Intern Architect Brandy Herlinger

Intern Architect David Steele

Drafter Tara Cooner

NPS Project Manager Tommy H. Jones

Project Team
x Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR
National Park Service xi

Hartrampf, Inc. and the Office of Jack Pyburn, 

Architect, Inc. would like to acknowledge the 

assistance of several people in the preparation of 

this report. Eric Ford, Project Supervisor at the 

Cane River Creole National Historical Park, and his 

staff were most helpful in locating and sharing 

information that they had obtained from the 

Hertzog family regarding the portion of Magnolia 

Plantation now contained within the confines of the 

park. In particular, Rick Gupman and David 

Williamson made themselves available and helped 

to facilitate locating and scanning of information in 

the park library. Barbara Yocum of the Northeast 

Region Cultural Resources Center kindly clarified 

some of the information found in her Materials 

Analysis report. Our thanks to several workers at 

Magnolia Plantation who provided keys, 

information, and directions as needed, always with 

good humor. The writers of this report would like to 

thank Ms. Betty Hertzog for her patience in 

answering questions regarding the buildings at 

Magnolia Plantation, some of which she has 

probably answered many times. The assistance of 

these kind people greatly facilitated the writing of 

this report.

The contract for this Historic Structure Report 

restricted the amount of background research for 

this building to the information provided by, the 

Park Service. In preparation for this report, 

Hartrampf, Inc. received information from the 

National Park Service regarding the history of the 

plantation and previous work completed by the 

Park Service at the Slave Hospital/Overseer’s 

House. The documents obtained from the National 

Park Service were Dr. Ann Patton Malone’s 

Magnolia Plantation Overview; Historic Structure 

Assessments for the Slave Hospital/Overseer’s 

House completed by Ali Miri, Historical Architect, 

of the National Park Service; the Comprehensive 

Subsurface Investigation for Magnolia Plantation 

completed by Dr. Bennie Keel and his staff of the 

Southeastern Archaeological Center; Building 

Materials Assessments for the Slave Hospital/

Overseer’s House by Barbara Yocum, Architectural 

Conservator at the Northeast Cultural Resources 

Center of the National Park Service; and Design 

Analysis – The Overseer’s House completed by the 

National Park Service Denver Service Center. 

Electronic files of HABS drawings of the buildings 

of interest were also obtained from the Southeast 

Regional Office of the National Park Service. In 

addition to these resources, Hartrampf, Inc. already 

possessed copies of the General Management Plan 

for the park as well as background information on 

the history and social context of the general area in 

the form of Dr. Ann Patton Malone’s unpublished 

manuscript, “Oakland Plantation – It’s People’s 

Testimony,” and “Bermuda- Oakland Plantation, 

1830- 1880,” an unpublished masters thesis by 

Carolyn Breedlove. Federal Census records 

provided additional insight into the changing 

demographics of the plantation. Back of the Big 

House - The Architecture of Plantation Slavery, by 

John Michael Vlach was also consulted. 

An initial site visit was conducted on March 25 

through March 29 of 2003 by members of the 

project team: Chau Tran and Deborah Harvey of 

Hartrampf, Inc., and Jack Pyburn and Jackie Renell 

of the Office of Jack Pyburn, Architect, Inc. During 

this visit, photographs and measurements of the 

buildings were taken, the Park Service staff was 

interviewed regarding stabilization measures 

already completed, and Ms. Betty Hertzog was 

interviewed regarding the general history of the 

plantation. The Hertzogs had previously allowed 

staff from the National Park Service to 

electronically scan some of their large collection of 

historic photographs, and the staff at Cane River 

Preface
xii Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Creole National Park allowed the report team to 

make copies of those files that are pertinent to this 

report. A second site visit was made by Jack Pyburn, 

AIA, of the Office of Jack Pyburn, Architect, Inc. on 

May 1 and 2 of 2003 to verify some of the initial 

information.

Draft versions of this report were submitted to the 

National Park Service for review and comment at 

the 75% and 95% milestones, and comments, 

changes, and additional information were 

incorporated into the 95% and Final Submittal 

reports.
National Park Service 1

This report deals with the building currently known 

as the Overseer’s House at the Magnolia Plantation 

unit of the Cane River Creole National Historical 

Park in Natchitoches Parish, Louisiana. Despite its 

current designation as the Overseer’s House, the 

building has served three distinct uses: as a slave 

hospital, as a residence for the plantation owners, 

and as a residence for hired workers on the 

plantation, including overseers. Each phase of use 

generated particular structural and architectural 

configurations and modifications that are discussed 

fully in the Chronology of Development and Use 

portion of this report.

Historical 

Summary

About 1820, Ambrose LeComte I began to purchase 

land along the Red River (now known as the Cane 

River) that eventually became Magnolia Plantation. 

His grandson, Ambrose LeComte II extended the 

LeComte holdings even further. The Slave Hospital/

Overseer’s House is located on lands purchased by 

Ambrose LeComte II from Gasparite LaCour in 

1835.

Although the exact date of construction of the Slave 

Hospital/Overseer’s House is unknown, materials 

analysis places it approximately in the 1840s, after 

construction of the original Main House of the 

Plantation. An 1858 plat map of Magnolia Plantation 

completed for Ambrose LeComte II by surveyor, 

George Walmsley, shows the building as a Slave 

Hospital, which is its likely first use.

Ambrose LeComte’s daughter, Atala LeComte 

married Matthew Hertzog, and the couple 

undertook the management of Magnolia Plantation 

for her father. Ambrose LeComte eventually moved 

to his townhouse in Natchitoches, and Matthew 

and Atala Hertzog moved into the Main House. 

Unfortunately, during the Red River Campaign of 

the Civil War, this house burned to the ground, and, 

according to oral tradition, the plantation overseer 

was killed. To facilitate management of the 

plantation during these turbulent times, the 

Hertzogs moved into the Slave Hospital and 

remodeled it for their own use until they could 

afford to rebuild the Main House. The rebuilding 

did not occur for thirty years until, in 1897, the 

Hertzogs moved into a new Main House 

constructed on the foundations of the old.

After the Hertzog’s moved into the new Main 

House, the building in which they had been living 

was used by plantation overseers, by then, called 

farm managers, as a residence, according to Ms. 

Betty Hertzog, who resides in the Main House at 

the time of the writing of this report. In 1900, 

Neuville Prud’homme, a relative of the Hertzog’s, 

was one overseer, but he lodged in the Main House. 

The tenant of the Overseer’s House was a second 

overseer of Magnolia Plantation, Edmund 

Delacorda, with his family.

Census records and Ms. Hertzog’s recollections 

indicate that F. M. Rouget was the overseer for the 

plantation in 1910 and lived in the Overseer’s House. 

It is not clear who occupied the Overseer’s House 

after Mr. Rouget. After Neuville Prud’homme 

retired, Ms. Hertzog recalled that several other 

overseers occupied the Overseer’s House, and at 

least one, George Lynn, made significant 

modifications to it, either with the permission of the 

Hertzogs or with their assistance.

During the 1950s, the Hertzogs relied increasingly 

on machinery and less on manpower to do the farm 

Management 

Summary
2 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

work. Fewer workers were needed on the farm due 

to mechanization, and fewer workers were available 

due to the out- migration of young workers to more 

lucrative jobs in factories in the north. The Hertzogs 

diversified their crops and revived the raising of 

cattle as a cash crop. A full- time farm manager other 

than the owner was no longer needed. By the mid1960s, the last of the overseers had left the 

plantation.

By 1976, many buildings on the plantation were no 

longer needed for the management of the plantation 

and were in danger of being lost due to deterioration 

and vandalism. Reluctant to see the historic 

structures from this part of their history lost, the 

Hertzogs donated the portion on which many of the 

buildings stood to Museum Contents, Inc., a local, 

non- profit, preservation group, with the 

understanding that the group would locate a 

suitable patron to preserve and protect the 

structures.

Betty Hertzog stated that, though Museum 

Contents, Inc. made some modifications to the brick 

slave cabins and the Gin Barn, it did not make any 

modifications or undertake any stabilization 

measures at the Overseer’s House. The buildings, 

including the Slave Hospital/Overseer’s House, were 

added to the National Register of Historic Places in 

1979, and, in 1996, ownership of the tract of land on 

which they stood was transferred to the National 

Park Service to become part of the newlydesignated Cane River Creole National Historical 

Park.

The National Park Service immediately embarked 

on stabilization activities aimed at curtailing the 

deterioration that the structures were experiencing. 

Some of these activities included replacing 

deteriorated roofing, shoring sagging walls, floors 

and ceilings, removing debris and damaged 

materials, protecting historic materials with 

plywood and screening, and rebuilding deteriorated 

foundations.

Many of these activities were accomplished by 

outside contractors hired by the Park Service, but 

since 1998, most of them were performed by Park 

Service personnel. These activities are chronicled in 

the following portion of this summary. On January 3, 

2001, the Overseer’s House was named a 

contributing structure when Magnolia Plantation, 

part of which is included in the Cane River Creole 

National Historical Park, was designated a National 

Historical Landmark.

Architectural 

Summary

The Overseer’s House, a special part of the history 

of Magnolia Plantation, has undergone significant 

changes in response to its evolution of use. Physical 

manifestations of its history are evident throughout 

the building, from the floor framing that 

corresponds with its original use as a slave hospital, 

to the historic modifications to convert it to a 

residence, to the more recent changes made to 

modernize the building.

The evolution of the Overseer’s House is without 

complete documentation of the changes. Through 

research and analysis, considerable information on 

how and when the building evolved has been 

revealed. However, some of the features in the 

building are difficult to specifically date. Based on 

the information presented in this report, theories on 

the development and purpose of these features are 

presented.

The Overseer’s House includes the main building 

and two wings, one of which is not physically 

attached to the building at the time of the writing of 

this report. Field investigation and historical 

documentation suggest that the main structure has 

been modified several times during three primary 

time periods. The modifications to the main 

building have resulted in the expansion of one room 

and the creation of one additional room out of an 

original enclosed space.

The gallery was enclosed in at least two phases of 

modification to the main building. In addition, two 

smaller buildings have been added to the main 

house. A small, freestanding building was relocated 

from another part of the plantation to the northeast 

side of the house. To the north of the relocated 

structure, and clearly constructed as an addition to 

the main building, is a second addition. 

The historical documentation on the Overseer’s 

House, coupled with the research and analysis 

completed in recent years, suggests that the main 

portion of the building was constructed circa 1840 
National Park Service 3

Management Summary

with several modifications and additions made by 

circa 1885. The building was modified several times 

through circa 1960, the time which the National 

Park Service has assigned in its General 

Management Plan as the end of the Period of 

Significance for Magnolia Plantation. In the General 

Management Plan, the National Park Service has 

assigned interpretive goals for the Overseer’s House 

to communicate its history through circa 1960. The 

physical qualities of the Overseer’s House circa 1960 

are summarized as follows.

Exterior Conditions

■ The original exterior walls of the main building 

sheltered by the galleries were bousillage1

 that 

had been coated with plaster and whitewashed. 

The added exterior walls of the main building 

that were sheltered by the galleries were 

finished with whitewashed, butt- jointed, 

horizontal boards. The exterior wall of the 

southern- most wing addition that was sheltered 

by the gallery was finished with whitewashed 

clapboard siding. 

■ The exterior walls of the main building and two 

wing additions not sheltered by the galleries 

were finished with rolled asphalt siding. 

■ The wood trim of the main building and 

additions was painted white and green. 

■ A gallery wrapped a portion of both the 

southwestern and southeastern elevations of the 

main building. Square columns with simple 

capitals derivative of the Tuscan order 

supported the gallery roof. A balustrade 

spanned the gallery columns. A gate was located 

between two columns on the southwest 

elevation. Stairs leading to the gallery were 

located at the gated entrance. 

■ A gallery extended the full length of the 

southeastern elevation of the southernmost 

wing addition (Room 111). This gallery 

connected with Room 106 via an angled gallery 

extension to Door 3 at the northeastern 

elevation of the main building. Stairs leading to 

this gallery were located on the northeastern 

end of Room 111. 

■ The roofing on the main building and wing 

additions was 5- V metal.

■ The brick chimneys and foundation piers at the 

perimeter of the main building and wing 

additions were parged and whitewashed. 

■ Half- round gutters and downspouts were 

located on the two wing additions. 

■ Simple wood brackets may have been located at 

the top of the gallery columns, just beneath the 

roof, by this time. Two photographs dating to 

circa 1940 and circa 1950 illustrate these 

brackets. It is possible they were still in 

existence circa 1960.

■ A door and window located in the northwestern 

elevation of Room 102 were exposed on both 

the interior and exterior. Both a board- andbatten door and a screen door hung in the 

opening. 

■ The door in the southeastern wall of Room 105 

had two doors hanging in the opening, a stileand- rail with multi- light door and a screened 

door. Above the door opening was a multi- light 

transom. The National Park Service removed 

these doors and the transom from their 

openings and installed temporary plywood 

stabilization panels in their place.

■ Lattice underpinning was installed along the 

southwest elevation of the main building.

Interior Conditions

■ The original hewn timber and bousillage walls 

were intact with the exception of portions of 

Room 101. The later circular- sawn frame walls 

were also intact. All of the interior walls, with 

the exception of those in Room 110, were 

covered with painted gypsum wallboard, the 

color of which varied from room to room. The 

walls of the Room 110 wing were the exposed, 

1. Bousillage was a common means of creating insulated 

walls generally used in Louisiana until the close of the 

Civil War or shortly thereafter. Bousillage was a 

mixture of clay and plant material or animal hair 

installed within a system of horizontal lath, called 

barreaux, affixed between the heavy timber upright 

members of a wall. The bousillage could remain an 

exterior finish of a structure, but it was usually either 

plastered and whitewashed or covered with board 

siding to protect the material.
4 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

unfinished framing and the interior surface of 

the exterior board siding.

■ Abandoned mortises that once held vertical 

bars dating to before the Civil War existed in the 

windows and transoms in Rooms 103 and 104. 

This detail is believed to be a remnant of the 

slave hospital building configuration. 

■ A staircase, which led to the attic, was located 

along the northeast wall of Room 106. 

■ There was a bathroom, Room 109, located in the 

northwestern corner of the main building, 

which was created out of a larger room (Room 

108) sometime in the twentieth century.

■ There was a closet, Room 108a, along a portion 

of the northeastern wall of Room 108. 

■ Kitchen cabinets and countertops, including an 

integral sink, and a hot water heater were 

located along the northeastern wall of Room 

105. 

■ There were four fireplaces located in the main 

building, in Rooms 101, 102, 103 and 104. The 

fireplaces in Rooms 102 and 103 are believed to 

be original to the building. 

■ The flooring throughout the main building, with 

the exception of Rooms 105 and 109, consisted 

of recently- installed pine boards. Rolled, 

asphaltic flooring covered the floor in Rooms 

105 and 109. The flooring in Rooms 110 and 111 

consisted of narrow, tongue- and- groove, pine 

boards laid over earlier historic flooring that 

differed in size and grain character from those 

that were commonly used throughout the main 

building.

■ There were light fixtures installed in each of the 

interior rooms of the main building and the 

wing additions sometime after 1937. 

■ There were twenty- one doors and fifteen 

windows throughout the main building and 

wing additions.

■ There were four planed, square, king- type posts 

with diagonal bracing attached to the underside 

of the roof ridge beam in the attic. These posts 

were sawn off just below the bracing and, 

therefore, did not bear on any other member. A 

discussion of theories regarding the reason for 

this construction may be found in the Physical 

Description portion of this report. 

■ The main roof framing included evidence of 

two dormers that were once located on the 

southwestern elevation of the main building 

roof.

■ The attic had a finished floor, comprised of 

boards oriented in varying directions and of 

various widths.

■ The house was piped for gas service from a tank 

on the site.

Summary of National Park Service 

Work

The National Park Service is actively working 

towards the stabilization and rehabilitation of the 

buildings and landscapes that comprise the portion 

of Magnolia Plantation in its possession. These 

efforts have included a 1996 materials analysis, a 

1997 historic structure assessment, and a 2002 

design analysis for the Overseer’s House. Various 

entities of the National Park Service, including the 

Historic Preservation Training Center, the 

Northeast Conservation Center, and staff members 

at the Park itself have undertaken work on the 

buildings at the Magnolia Plantation component of 

the Cane River Creole National Historical Park.

The Overseer’s House has also been stabilized and 

modified by contractors working for Museum 

Contents, Inc. and the National Park Service. It 

should be noted that the work completed by 

contractors was not always sensitive to the historic 

fabric and appearance of the building. The work 

completed to date on this building is listed below.

■ Reconstructing the roof framing for the main 

building. This treatment involved removing all 

evidence of the historic dormers that were 

located on the southwest elevation of the roof 

sometime between 1930 and 1959. 

■ Installing new 5- V metal roofing on the main 

building.
National Park Service 5

Management Summary

■ Removing the asphalt siding on the exterior 

walls of the main building and replacing it with 

new clapboard siding. This treatment involved 

covering two historic door openings and one 

historic window opening with clapboards so 

that they are no longer expressed on the 

exterior.

■ Reconstructing the brick piers along the 

perimeter of the main building and all those 

beneath the two wing additions. 

■ Repairing the rafters and replacing the 

sheathing in the gallery roof.

■ Reinforcing the gallery floor framing through 

the installation of new framing members, 

including new sill beams.

■ Replacing all of the sill beams throughout the 

floor framing of the main building.

■ Repairing the gallery columns.

■ Installing temporary plywood stabilization 

doors in the openings for Door 4 and Door 20.

■ Removing the porch swing from the southern 

corner of the gallery on the main building. 

■ Removing the lattice underpinning along the 

southwest elevation of the main building.

■ Installing ogee gutters and downspouts on the 

wing additions.

■ Installing expanded polystyrene insulation 

board over the northwest interior wall of Room 

102.

The work preformed on the Overseer’s House by 

contractors hired before the Park Service came into 

possession of the property and by the National Park 

Service has, in some cases, not resulted in a 

consistent and appropriate treatment for the period 

of significance established by the National Park 

Service. In particular, the installation of new, 

clapboard siding on the exterior walls of the main 

building not sheltered by the galleries has altered the 

character of both the building and the overall 

historic setting in that area of the plantation from its 

circa 1960 appearance because it covers three 

historically significant openings to the building, 

Doors 2 and 3 and Window 3. Furthermore, the 

installation of this siding is inconsistent with the 

circa 1960 appearance of the building, as historic 

documentation has revealed that the rolled, asphalt 

siding that was removed was installed sometime 

between 1959 and 1961 and, therefore, is 

representative of the last years in the period of 

significance.

On the other hand, the National Park Service has 

taken some positive steps to protect the building 

from further decline. Reconstructing the brick piers 

and some of the floor framing beneath the galleries 

on the main building was necessary to stabilize the 

building and arrest further deterioration. However, 

the piers have not been parged and whitewashed, a 

treatment consistent with the 1960 conditions. 

Summary of Recommended 

Treatments

The optimal treatment approach for the Overseer’s 

House is based on the knowledge of and respect for 

its historic materials and how they are assembled. As 

prescribed in the General Management Plan the 

buildings at Magnolia Plantation are to be preserved 

and restored to their circa 1960 character. The 

General Management Plan has designated the 

Overseer’s House to be used for interior and 

exterior interpretation, exhibits, and, possibly, for 

some limited storage. The history and condition of 

this building has been researched and analyzed, and 

recommended treatments have been established for 

the consideration of the National Park Service. 

These treatments are summarized below.

■ Restore the brick foundation piers interior to 

the main building. Repair parging and 

whitewash all exterior piers on both the main 

building and the wing additions. 

■ Remove the existing clapboard from the 

exterior walls of the main building and re- lay it 

flat, with flush joints, to serve as sheathing. 

Install unpatterned, granulated asphalt siding of 

a color similar to the historic siding that 

currently exists on the wing additions. This 

treatment should expose the historic door and 

window openings currently concealed by the 

non- historic clapboard (Doors 2 and 3 and 

Window 3).
6 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

■ Install an appropriately- designed ramp, 

consistent with the requirements provided in 

the Americans with Disabilities Act, and at a 

location that avoids negative impacts on 

archaeological resources and on views of the 

historic building.

■ Examine the existing roofing on the wing 

additions for any damage or moisture 

infiltration. Repair where necessary using 

materials that match the historic in dimension, 

detail, and finish.

■ Install chimney caps that protect the flues but 

are not visible from the exterior on all the 

chimneys. 

■ Reconstruct the shed roof that historically 

existed over Door 3 on the northeast elevation 

of the main building.

■ Reconstruct the gated balustrade along the 

galleries on the main building. 

■ Reconstruct the brackets along the tops of the 

gallery columns on the main building, as they 

likely existed circa 1960. The circa 1940s and 

1950s photographs of the Overseer’s House 

should be used to replicate the historic 

appearance of the brackets.

■ Reconstruct the stairs to the gallery on the 

southwest elevation of the main building.

■ Reconstruct the gallery on the southeast 

elevation of the southernmost wing addition. 

This gallery should be reconstructed in its 

historic configuration, by connecting it with the 

main building at Door 3. 

■ Rehang the historic doors in door openings 4 

and 20. If these doors no longer exist, new 

doors should be constructed to match the 

historic using existing documentation.

■ Rehang the historic window and door shutters 

for the main house currently stored within the 

building.

■ Remove the existing ogee gutters and 

downspouts on the two wing additions and 

install half- round gutters to match those that 

existed historically circa 1960.

■ Remove the temporary expanded polystyrene 

insulation board from the northwest interior 

wall of Room 102. This will expose Door 2 and 

Window 3 to the interior of the room. If the 

historic gypsum wallboard exists beneath the 

insulation board, repair and repaint, as 

necessary to its historic finish. If this wallboard 

has been removed, install new gypsum 

wallboard and paint it according to the historic 

finish that has been identified for that room 

circa 1960.

■ All other interior finishes should be considered 

historic and preserved accordingly. Reference 

should be made to the Materials Analysis that 

was completed in 1996 by Barbara Yocum when 

cleaning or repairing the finishes in order to 

accurately interpret their circa 1960 appearance.

■ Retain the existing historic light fixtures for 

interpretation. New power service will be 

required to allow for lighting of the space and 

specific exhibits. All new lighting equipment 

should meet modern codes. Lighting of the 

space should be accomplished in a manner that 

provides the historically appropriate amount 

and quality of light that was produced by the 

historic fixtures, with spot lighting where 

required for exhibits, preferably integral to the 

exhibit and not requiring intrusion into the 

historic fabric. All new fixtures and equipment 

should be installed in a manner that does not 

impact the historic integrity of the building.

■ Retain all of the remaining features of the gas 

service that are evident in the main building for 

interpretive purposes.

The National Park Service has committed to educate 

the public on the history of Magnolia Plantation and 

the functions of its structures. Therefore, it will be 

important to faithfully treat the Overseer’s House in 

a manner that will achieve a consistent presentation 

of its composition, materials, and assembly circa 

1960, as prescribed in the General Management 

Plan. This treatment approach will ensure the visitor 

a glimpse of how Magnolia Plantation evolved 

throughout its history in response to the changing 
National Park Service 7

Management Summary

needs of both its owners and those who worked for 

them.

Administrative 

Data

Locational Data

Building Name. Overseer’s House

Building Address. Magnolia Plantation, Derry, 

Louisiana, 71456

LCS #. 091558

Related Studies

Jones, Tommy, The Gin Barn, Magnolia Plantation, Cane 

River Creole National Historical Park, Historic 

Structure Report, Atlanta: National Park Service 

Southeast Support Office, 2002.

Keel, Bennie C., with Christina E. Miller and Marc A. 

Tiemann, A Comprehensive Subsurface Investigation 

at Magnolia Plantation. Tallahassee: Southeast 

Archeological Center, 1999.

Malone, Ann Patton, Ph.D., "The Magnolia Plantation 

Overview," unpublished MS, November 1996.

Miri, Ali A., Historic Structure Assessment Report – 

Hospital/Overseer’s House, Magnolia Plantation. 

Atlanta: Southeast Field Area, National Park Service, 

1997.

National Park Service, Cane River Creole National 

Historical Park General Management Plan/

Environmental Impact Statement, 2001.

National Park Service, Design Analysis – The Overseer’s 

House: Preserve and Stabilize Magnolia Plantation 

Structures, Denver: Denver Service Center, 2002.

Yocum, Barbara A., "Magnolia Plantation: Building 

Materials Assessment and Analysis. Lowell, 

Massachusetts: Northeast Cultural Resources Center, 

Northeast Field Area, National Park Service, 1996.

Cultural Resource Data

National Register of Historic Places. The 

LeComte- Hertzog Plantation (Magnolia 

Plantation), was listed in the National Register of 

Historic Places in 1979.

National Historic Landmark. The Overseer’s House 

was named a contributing structure when Magnolia 

Plantation was designated a National Historic 

Landmark on January 3, 2001.

Period of Significance. The period of significance 

for Magnolia Plantation begins with the founding of 

FIGURE 1. The Overseer’s House in 2003.
8 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

the plantation and concludes about 1960, around the 

time that the last of the sharecroppers and tenants 

were leaving the plantation. 

Proposed Treatment and Use. According to the 

National Park Service General Management Plan 

for this park, the Overseer’s House is to be 

interpreted from the interior and contain exhibits 

and some limited storage.
National Park Service 9

This history deals with Magnolia Plantation, part of 

which is included in the Cane River Creole National 

Historical Park in Natchitoches, Louisiana. The 

building under discussion in this report is the 

Overseer’s House. Historian Dr. Ann Patton 

Malone compiled a comprehensive history of 

Magnolia Plantation for the National Park Service 

in 1996. This overview of the history of the 

plantation on which the building under review 

stands is based largely on her work and will not be 

individually noted unless explicitly quoted. Other 

references are noted in the body of the text.

Antebellum 

Magnolia

Magnolia Plantation was established about 1835 by 

Ambrose LeComte II and his wife, Julia Buard 

LeComte. However, much of its lands were secured 

earlier by his grandfather, Ambrose LeComte I, who 

assembled his plantation by combining lands 

obtained through French and Spanish land grants 

made to the LeComte family in the mid and late 

1700s with judicious purchases of land from smaller 

planters during times of economic distress or 

disbursement of estates. Jean Baptiste LeComte I, 

father of Ambrose LeComte I, received a land grant 

in 1753 on both sides of the Red River (later known 

as the Cane River). He settled in the Shallow Lake 

area, across the river from present- day Magnolia 

Plantation, with his wife, Marguerite LeRoy. It was 

there that Ambrose LeComte I was born in 1760. By 

1786, Ambrose LeComte I had married Helene 

Cloutier, and they had one son, Jean Baptiste 

LeComte II. Ambrose LeComte I also received a 

Spanish land grant in an area 30 miles west of 

Cloutierville, which he developed into a ranch. 

Preoccupied with this development, he left the 

management of the Cane River property to his son, 

Jean Baptiste LeComte II, who married Marie Anne 

Cephalide Lambre in 1806. Their son, Ambrose 

LeComte II, was born in 1807. After the Panic of 

1819, Ambrose LeComte I began to purchase lands 

adjoining the original grant on the Cane River. With 

his son acting as his representative, he purchased 

lands on the east bank of the Cane River from 

Gasparite LaCour; Louis, Belloni, and Jacques 

Vercher; and L. Gallien in April of 1820. He 

purchased more property from Barthelemy LaCour 

in 1824, from Nanet Larnadier in 1825, and from 

Louis Gallien in 1826.

In 1827, Ambrose LeComte II married Marie Julia 

Buard. In the early 1830s, they began the 

construction of a home at Magnolia Plantation. In 

October of 1833 either he or his grandfather, 

Ambrose LeComte I, purchased a tract of land on 

the east bank of the Cane River from the estate of 

Athanase Brosset and his wife, Celeste Baudoin. In 

December, Ambrose LeComte also purchased the 

Barthelemy LaCour plantation, and, in 1834, he 

purchased land on both sides of the Cane River 

from Jean Baptiste LaCour. In July of 1835, Ambrose 

LeComte II purchased property on both sides of the 

Cane River from Gasparite LaCour that included 

"houses, outhouses, cotton gin and other buildings 

thereon."1

 This is the land on which the Magnolia 

Plantation gin barn is located. It is not known what 

other outbuildings were included in this sale. The 

buildings that are currently part of the Cane River 

Creole National Historical Park are mostly located 

on this property purchased from Gasparite LaCour 

in 1835, including the Overseer’s House, which is the 

focus of this report. 

1. Dr. Ann Patton Malone, "The Magnolia Plantation 

Overview," unpublished MS completed for the 

National Park Service, 1996, p. 37.

Historical Background 

and Context
10 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Historical Background & Context

Despite the Panic of 1837 and the recession of the 

early 1840s, Ambrose LeComte II continued to 

expand his holdings. Material analysis indicates that 

the original portion of the Overseer’s House was 

likely built during the 1840s for use as a slave 

hospital. In 1845, Ambrose LeComte’s wife, Julia 

Buard, died. He remarried in 1846 to the Widow 

Bossier, Lise Victoire Desiree Sompayrac, and began 

to devote his time to horse breeding and racing, 

leaving the daily management of the plantation to his 

overseers. Ambrose LeComte II and his wife, with 

their combined families of children, had moved to 

his townhouse in Natchitoches by 1850.2

 Suzette 

Buard, the widowed sister of LeComte’s first wife, 

was living at Magnolia Plantation at that time. The 

1850 Federal Census of Natchitoches Parish 

indicates that the overseer for Magnolia Plantation 

at that time was probably George Cobb, who hailed 

from Alabama.3

 It is unknown in what structure Mr. 

Cobb lived. However, by 1851, a different overseer, 

W.B. Eddins, was corresponding regularly with 

Ambrose LeComte regarding management issues at 

Magnolia Plantation, including the construction of a 

new residence.4 In 1852, Ambrose LeComte’s 

daughter, Ursele Atala, married Matthew Hertzog. 

After their marriage, Ambrose LeComte II gave the 

couple a 40% interest in Magnolia Plantation, 

retaining 60% for himself.5

 Overseer Eddins died in 

September of 1852. According to family legend, the 

Matthew Hertzogs moved into the new Main House 

at Magnolia Plantation, probably after Eddins died, 

and undertook the management of the plantation 

for Ambrose LeComte II.6

Residence at the Magnolia Plantation Main House 

appears to have been a fluid arrangement. By the 

1860 census, Ambrose LeComte II and his wife were 

again living on Magnolia Plantation.7

 The location 

of Matthew and Atala Hertzog is not clear; they were 

enumerated twice in the census, once along the 

Cane River but not at Magnolia Plantation, and once 

in the town of Natchitoches, though not in the 

LeComte townhouse.8 This double enumeration 

occurred because the planter society kept more than 

one home and spent time in each home during the 

year. The Matthew Hertzog family is enumerated 

along the river with a newborn infant, Caesar 

Hertzog, less than two months old. Later, however, 

they are enumerated in the town of Natchitoches 

without the infant. It is likely that the Hertzogs 

moved to a family residence in town to be closer to a 

physician or as a response to the death of the infant 

between the time of their first enumeration and their 

second. Census- takers were instructed to 

enumerate whoever was in a residence at the time of 

their taking of the census, so they would not 

necessarily think it improper to enumerate the same 

family in two different locations. The census records 

show two probable overseers for Magnolia 

Plantation in 1860: Theodore Lacour and G.E. 

Spillman. What structures these overseers occupied 

is unknown. 

The main crop at Magnolia Plantation was cotton, 

which replaced indigo and tobacco as the major 

export crops in the area in the early 1800s. The 1850s 

were a time of high cotton prices and high 

expectations for the planters along Cane River. It 

was a period of expansion and improvement to the 

plantation operations. At Magnolia, the cotton gin 

was converted to steam by 1856. A plat of Magnolia 

plantation rendered in 1858 indicates that the 

Overseer’s House existed at that time. However, on 

the plat, it is labeled “Hospital.” It appears, from 

research into the probable original configuration of 

the building, that it was constructed as a hospital for 

the slaves of the plantation. Where the overseers 

lived in unclear. However, it is possible, based on the 

arrangement of the building, that an overseer 

occupied the eastern rooms of the structure. Malone 

suggests that a building she labeled "Cottage Buard,” 

and called "the Cottage" by the Hertzog family, 

could have been used as a dwelling for overseers 

before the Civil War. Bennie Keel notes that Malone 

misread the label on the 1858 plat of the building 

used for baled cotton,9 likely a storage facility for 

cotton awaiting shipment on the steamboats that 

plied the waters of the Cane River. Nevertheless, 

Keel also refers to "Cottage Buard," and cites 

archaeological evidence for its existence. This 

archaeological evidence, however, does not 

2. Seventh Census of the United States, 1850 Population 

Schedule, Natchitoches Parish, LA, reviewed online at 

Ancestry.com, 2003.

3. Ibid.

4. Bennie C. Keel, A Comprehensive Subsurface 

Investigation at Magnolia Plantation, Tallahassee: 

National Park Service Southeast Archeological Center, 

1999, pp. 84-88.

5. Ibid., p. 19.

6. Ibid., pp. 85-87.

7. Eighth Census of the United States, 1860 Population 

Schedule, Natchitoches Parish, LA, reviewed online at 

Ancestry.com, 2003.

8. Ibid.

9. Keel, p. 24.
National Park Service 11

Part I: Developmental History

correspond to the location of any building shown 

on the 1858 plat map; it is farther north of the gin 

barn than the baled cotton building, southwest of 

the location of the former corn cribs, and located 

along the road.10 The surveyor who rendered the 

plat, G. S. Walmsley, took the trouble to locate corn 

cribs and rain houses, relatively insubstantial 

structures, on the 1858 plat map; it seems likely he 

would have also located the Cottage if had existed. 

Therefore, the so- called "Cottage Buard" probably 

did not exist in 1858. Malone’s description of the 

building indicates that it was probably constructed 

before the Civil War as it was built of cypress timber, 

brick, and bousillage, a construction method not 

used long after the war. It is therefore logical to 

conclude that "the Cottage" was built between 1858 

and the mid- 1860s, and could, indeed, have been 

used to house an overseer of the plantation.

The Civil War

The outbreak of the Civil War in 1861 changed life on 

Cane River, as it did elsewhere in the nation. 

Although cotton production was high, distribution 

for sale became increasingly difficult and, 

eventually, impossible. With the fall of New Orleans 

to Federal forces in 1862, the last outlet for the sale 

of Cane River cotton closed. Planters in the area 

turned to other crops for local consumption and 

stored their cotton, hoping to recoup their losses 

when the war ended. The fighting reached the area 

in 1864 during the Red River campaign, and directly 

impacted Magnolia Plantation. Federal forces, 

retreating down the Cane River, burned buildings as 

they went. Despite their original orders to fire only 

cotton in order to deprive the South of a means of 

financing a continuation of the war effort, they also 

burned barns, gins, and houses. The Main House at 

Magnolia Plantation was burned to the ground.

According to family legend, the LeComtes and the 

Hertzogs had apparently removed to the safety of 

their town homes in Natchitoches, leaving the 

overseers to tend to the business of the plantation. 

Family legend records that the overseer was killed 

by the Federal forces under the steps of the Main 

House. With the plantation house and the overseer 

gone, Matthew and Atala Hertzog moved their 

family into the Slave Hospital and renovated it for 

their use as a residence. The Hertzogs, like their 

neighbors in the area, found themselves in seriously 

reduced circumstances. With their cash crop 

destroyed, their livestock and foodstuff confiscated 

by both the Confederate army and the foraging 

Federal forces, and their workforce depleted by 

conscription and desertion, their prospects looked 

bleak. They and their remaining workforce turned 

to subsistence farming for the remainder of the war.

Reconstruction

With the end of the Civil War in 1865, the situation 

began to improve. The former relationship between 

the planters and their workforce was ended, but a 

new one was forged, though not without difficulty. 

The local Union commander, Lieutenant Colonel 

S.G. Van Anda, issued orders instructing the freed 

workers of the area to remain on the plantations 

where they had formerly been slaves and instructing 

their former owners to sign contracts with them as 

hired labor.11 The Freedmen’s Bureau helped the 

former slaves to negotiate labor contracts with their 

former owners. However, discontent with the 

contract situation caused many workers to refuse to 

sign contracts in 1867 and 1868. They felt that the 

contract labor system was not a sufficient 

improvement over their original, enslaved 

condition. As an alternative, sharecropping was 

gradually introduced to the area to provide labor to 

produce the crops. Though an imperfect alternative, 

the laborers saw sharecropping as a means of 

accumulating enough wealth to eventually purchase 

land of their own. To the planters, it provided relief 

from the necessity of producing cash payments for 

their workers on a quarterly basis regardless of the 

success of the previous crop. The laborers, thus, 

assumed a share of the responsibility for the success 

of the crop, since their own profits depended upon 

that success.

Unfortunately, though cotton prices were high 

immediately after the war, production was low due 

to floods, caterpillars, and labor problems. As the 

labor problems were resolved and production 

began to climb, prices began to drop. During the 

1870s, farmers were able to increase production, but 

10. Ibid., pp. 25, 61.

11. Carolyn Breedlove, "Bermuda/Oakland Plantation, 

1830-1880," unpublished masters thesis, 

Northwestern State University of Louisiana, 1999, p. 

45.
12 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Historical Background & Context

prices were often below cost. As a result, both 

sharecroppers and owners often found it difficult to 

make ends meet. When they could not meet their 

charges for supplies for the crop of the current year, 

they were obliged to borrow or charge even more in 

order to purchase supplies for the crop of the 

following year. This debt spiral made it increasingly 

hard for sharecroppers to make a living, and many of 

them left the area in the late 1870s to try their luck at 

homesteading in Kansas. It appears from the 1870 

census that the Hertzogs did not employ an overseer 

immediately after the war. Mathew Hertzog is the 

only male listed in the vicinity of Magnolia 

Plantation that recorded his occupation as farmer 

rather than laborer.12 In the rest of this census, 

plantation overseers tended to list their occupation 

as farm manager or overseer. It is reasonable to 

assume, therefore, that Mathew Hertzog undertook 

the direct management of Magnolia Plantation after 

the Civil War without the help of an overseer.

In 1883, Ambrose LeComte II died. Atala, and 

Matthew Hertzog inherited Magnolia Plantation, 

which they had managed for him for thirty years. In 

the 1890s, the Hertzogs began rebuilding the Main 

House on the existing foundation remaining after 

the destruction of the original house in 1864. They 

demolished many of the original brick slave cabins 

in the Quarters and used the brick for the 

construction of the new Main House. Matthew and 

Atala moved into the new house in early 1897, less 

than a year before Atala’s death. After the move, the 

former slave hospital was often used to house the 

overseers of Magnolia Plantation, and the building 

came to be known as the Overseer’s House. In the 

1890s, Matthew Hertzog employed three overseers 

at Magnolia Plantation, Neuville Prud’homme, 

Walter Parror, and Edmund Delacorda.13 According 

to the 1900 census, Edmund Delacorda lived in the 

12. Ninth Census of the United States, 1870 Population 

Schedule, Natchitoches Parish, LA, reviewed online at 

Ancestry.com, 2003.

FIGURE 1. Overseer’s House, after late 1930s. (Courtesy of Ambrose J. Hertzog III.)

13. "Farming Today - Farming of the 90’s," Natchitoches: 

Natchitoches Times, probably 1941 (exact date 

unknown), in "1939-1949 Scrapbook," private Hertzog 

collection, Magnolia, Plantation. Also, Twelfth Census 

of the United States, 1900, Population Schedules, 

Natchitoches Parish, LA, reviewed online at 

Ancestry.com, 2003.
National Park Service 13

Part I: Developmental History

Overseer’s House with his wife and nine children. 

Neuville Prud’homme is also listed in the 1900 

census as the "farm manager" and is recorded as 

living in the Main House with his distant relatives, 

the Hertzogs.14

20th Century 

Magnolia

After Matthew Hertzog died in 1903, his estate was 

inherited by his two surviving children, Ambrose J. 

Hertzog, and Frances "Fanny" Hertzog Chopin, 

and divided between them. Ambrose Hertzog 

received the major portion of Magnolia Plantation 

that is included in the Cane River Creole National 

Historical Park. Fanny, however, inherited, among 

other parcels, the land on which the Gin Barn and 

Quarters are located. She sold that portion to her 

brother to keep the work area intact. Ambrose J. 

Hertzog and his wife, Sarah (Sallie) Hunter Hertzog 

continued to operate Magnolia Plantation.

Ambrose J. Hertzog and Sallie Hunter Hertzog 

married in 1892. They had five children who 

survived infancy: Matthew Hertzog II, Marie 

Louise Hertzog, Marie Atala Hertzog, Sarah Hunter 

Hertzog, and Ambrose John Hertzog II. Their 

oldest son, Matthew Hertzog II, served in the 

Armed Forces during World War I and then 

returned to the plantation to assist his parents in its 

management. With his bride, Lydia Compton 

Hertzog, he shared the Main House with his 

parents. Their daughter, Betty Hertzog, still resides 

at Magnolia’s Main House at the time of the writing 

of this report. The youngest son of Ambrose and 

Sallie Hertzog, Ambrose John Hertzog II, married 

Irma Behrens. They had three children: Irma Jane 

Hertzog, Ambrose John Hertzog III, and Matthew 

Hertzog. Ambrose J. Hertzog II died in 1991, but his 

son, Ambrose J. Hertzog III, still resides at Magnolia 

Plantation (in 2003), in a house built in 1976 to the 

north of the Main House. Betty Hertzog and 

Ambrose J. Hertzog III are the current (2003) 

owners of the portion of Magnolia Plantation not 

included in the Cane River Creole National 

Historical Park.

14. Twelfth Census of the United States, 1900 Population 

Schedule, Natchitoches Parish, LA, reviewed online at 

Ancestry.com, 2003.

FIGURE 2. Overseer’s House, after late 1940s. (Courtesy of Ambrose J. Hertzog III)
14 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Historical Background & Context

During a personal interview with her, conducted by 

Deborah Harvey of Hartrampf, Inc. in 2003, Betty 

Hertzog recalled the names of overseers at Magnolia 

Plantation in the first half of the twentieth century.15

According to Ms. Hertzog, a Mr. Rouget was 

overseer when her father, Matthew Hertzog II, was a 

child. F. M. Rouget appears in the 1910 census with 

his wife and six children in a location that indicates 

they may have occupied the Overseer’s House.16 He 

was followed by Neuville Prud’homme, who again 

lived at the Main House rather than in the 

Overseer’s House. Neuville Prud’homme was the 

overseer both before and after 

Mr. Rouget. In both the 1900 and the 1930 censuses, 

Neuville Prud’homme is listed as "farm manager" 

and a boarder in the Main House at Magnolia 

Plantation,17 but he apparently did not live at 

Magnolia Plantation during the tenure of F.M. 

Rouget as overseer.18 Neuville Prud’homme was 

replaced as overseer by Henry Gallien some time 

after 1930. He and his family probably lived in the 

Overseer’s House. Henry Gallien’s son, Leslie 

Gallien became the overseer after his father. When 

Leslie Gallien left, Telese Rachal and his wife moved 

into the Overseer’s House and lived there for a year. 

Betty Hertzog asserted that, during that year, they 

never hooked up the hot water heater, though it was 

available. The hot water heater was installed in 

1948,19 which indicates when the Rachals lived in the 

Overseer’s House. Betty Hertzog remembered that 

Floyd Thompson was the overseer in 1958, when the 

movie, The Horse Soldiers, was made in the area. 

Following Floyd Thompson, George Lynn became 

the overseer between 1959 and 1961.20 He and his 

15. Betty Hertzog to Deborah Harvey, oral interview, 

March 2003.

16. Thirteenth Census of the United States, 1910 

Population Schedule, Natchitoches Parish, LA, 

reviewed online at Ancestry.com, 2003.

FIGURE 3. Hay wagon in front of overseer’s house in 1950s. (Courtesy Ambrose J. Hertzog III)

17. Twelfth and Fifteenth Censuses of the United States, 

1900 and 1930 Population Schedules, Natchitoches 

Parish, LA, reviewed online at Ancestry.com, 2003.

18. Thirteenth Census of the United States, 1910 

Population Schedule, Natchitoches Parish, LA, 

reviewed online at Ancestry.com, 2003.

19. The State Stove and Pipe Company, which 

manufactured the hot water heater housed in the 

Overseer’s House, was founded in 1946.
National Park Service 15

Part I: Developmental History

wife installed the gypsum board over the exposed 

bousillage walls and laid new flooring, among other 

improvements. Mr. Arledge was likely the last 

overseer at Magnolia Plantation. Betty Hertzog 

could not remember the dates of his service.

By 1938, electricity had come to the Cane River 

area.21 Matthew Hertzog II reported in about 1941 

that electrification had been partly introduced to 

the plantation,22 but, for the most part, the Hertzogs 

continued to use the traditional methods of 

farming, including crop rotation and cultivation 

using manual and animal- powered methods. 

Magnolia Plantation boasted little in the way of 

mechanization, though that was slowly changing.

 The Hertzogs used both sharecroppers and day 

laborers in their operations. They provided housing 

for all their workforce. According to Betty Hertzog, 

the day laborers, who were usually single men, were 

housed in the former slave quarters, and the tenant 

farmers, generally family men, were housed in 

tenant houses constructed along the roadside and 

close to their assigned plots of land.23 At one time, 

the Hertzogs provided housing and work for up to 

forty- five families. The day laborers were generally 

assigned to operate the mechanized equipment, 

such as tractors and ginning equipment. The tenant 

farmers relied on mule- powered equipment to farm 

the forty acres assigned to them. They were also 

"required to own a cow and a mule and to raise a 

crop of vegetables to supply their own tables."24

In 1939, a tornado ripped through Magnolia 

Plantation, demolishing the Cottage, where 

Neuville Prudhomme was living, and damaging the 

eight remaining brick cabins and the gin barn. The 

steam- powered cotton gin was destroyed. Possibly 

in response to the necessity of replacing damaged 

farm equipment, the move to mechanization at 

Magnolia Plantation accelerated. It was at this time 

that the Hertzogs ceased ginning their own cotton, 

and the old gin barn, which had also been used as a 

hay barn since the 1920s, was repaired and 

remodeled.25 The brick houses for the day laborers, 

which were the remaining original slave cabins, was 

repaired, and electricity was installed there by 1946.

During the 1950s, the Hertzogs ended 

sharecropping arrangements with their workers, as 

did most of the planters of the area, but continued 

to hire day laborers to work their crops. Fewer 

workers were needed due to mechanization, and 

fewer workers were available due to the continued 

out- migration of young people to work in the 

factories in the north. The Hertzogs revived the 

raising of cattle as a cash crop and diversified their 

field crops. By the mid- 1960s, a resident farm 

manager other than the owner was no longer 

needed on the plantation, and the Overseer’s House 

fell vacant.

20. Ali A. Miri, Historic Structure Assessment Report – 

Hospital/Overseer’s House, Magnolia Plantation – 

Historic Asset Assessment Report, Atlanta: National 

Park Service Southeast Support Office, 1997, p. 2.

21. Valley Electric Corporation, which services the area 

today, was incorporated in 1937 and began to provide 

service in 1938, according to Doris Brett Vincent, in email to Deborah Harvey, March 2003.

22. “Farming Today,” n.p.

23. Betty Hertzog to Deborah Harvey, oral interview, 

March, 2003.

24. Malone, p. 99.

25. Jones, p. 7. 
16 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Historical Background & Context
National Park Service 17

The Overseer’s House has provided shelter for a 

diverse spectrum of plantation residents including 

invalid slaves, the plantation owners, and the 

overseers. Historic documentation suggests the 

house was originally used as the plantation slave 

hospital. In particular, G. S. Walmsley’s circa 1858 

plat map, referenced in the previous section of this 

report, illustrates a "Slave Hospital" in the 

approximate location and configuration of the 

existing Overseer’s House. The similarities between 

the roof profile on the Walmsley map and that of the 

existing Overseer’s House suggests that the two 

buildings are one and the same. Additionally, 

physical evidence documented during the field 

analysis for this report, as well as in several National 

Park Service analyses, indicates that the building 

may once have been used as a slave hospital. 

Specifically, open mortises in the heads of several of 

the original window openings appear to have once 

held square wood bars. The use of bars suggests that 

some degree of security was desired, perhaps to 

prevent the building’s occupants from leaving or to 

prevent intrusion into the building.

Original Building

Another feature that suggests the building’s original 

use as a slave hospital is the floor plan. Analysis of 

the historic floor plan and wall framing provides 

insight into the evolution of the building. Barbara 

Yocum’s 1996 Materials Analysis identified the 

historic materials used in the construction and 

expansion of the building. In addition, Ali Miri’s 

1997 Historic Structure Assessment Report explored 

several theories regarding the configuration and 

evolution of the original floor plan. Miri’s first 

theory is that the original building consisted of one 

large, rectangular room surrounded by a gallery on 

all sides. In this configuration, the large room was 

slightly longer than the existing length of Rooms 103 

and 104 combined. In his report, Miri illustrates this 

floor plan, noting that the original northeast wall of 

the room was removed at some point and a new 

northeast wall constructed, which resulted in 

shortening the length of the room to the existing 

size of Rooms 103 and 104 combined.

The next floor plan presented by Miri consists of 

two rooms, one larger than the other. As with the 

first theory, Miri suggests that the larger room is the 

same size as the existing Rooms 103 and 104 

combined. The smaller of the two rooms is the same 

size as the existing Room 102. Changes to the floor 

plan not discussed by Miri are the removal of the 

two doors illustrated on the first floor plan and the 

addition of a double- sided fireplace between the 

two rooms.

FIGURE 1. Original Floor Plan Configuration: First 

Theory. Drawing excerpted from Ali Miri’s 1997 Historic 

Structure Assessment Report for the Overseer’s House/Slave 

Hospital at Magnolia Plantation.

Chronology of 

Development and Use
18 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Chronology of Development and Use

Finally, Miri theorizes that the original floor plan 

could have been a T- configuration, which included 

the rooms identified in this report as Room 101 (in 

part), Room 102, Room 103, Room 104, Room 108 

and Room 109 (see diagram on following page). 

However, in this theory Miri suggests that, when 

originally constructed, the building had only four 

rooms, which covered the area currently 

encompassing the six rooms listed above. In the 

suggested original configuration, Rooms 101, 102 and 

108 were all of equal depth (the same depth of the 

existing Room 102), Room 108 included Room 109, 

and Rooms 103 and 104 were one large room. As 

Miri points out, this large room would have been 

appropriate for hospital use, serving as the sick 

ward. Miri further notes that the floor and ceiling 

framing is consistent with the T- configuration of 

rooms. 

This last floor plan configuration appears to be the 

most likely original floor plan. In addition to the 

floor and ceiling structures, other physical evidence 

supports this theory. Part of the floor structure is 

constructed around the brick fireplace foundation 

between Rooms 102 and 103, indicating that Room 

102 is part of the original floor plan. While this also 

supports Miri’s second theory, the existence of the 

T- configuration in the floor and ceiling plans 

suggests that the original rooms were arranged the 

same way. If the original plan had been consistent 

with Miri’s second theory, resulting in Rooms 101 

and 108 being later additions to the building, the 

orientation of the floor and ceiling framing 

members in each of these rooms would be an 

unusual treatment, without any existing supporting 

evidence. As shown below, the configuration of the 

foundation framing is especially supportive of the 

T- configuration theory.

Extending from the exterior southeast wall of Room 

101 and wrapping around the building to the exterior 

southeast wall of Room 108 was a gallery. On the 

interior of the building, in the earliest layout, were 

two fireplaces sharing one chimney. One fireplace 

was in Room 102, and the other fireplace was in the 

larger room, now Rooms 103 and 104. There were 

eleven windows and ten doors in the original floor 

plan. The original windows are identified on the 

following existing floor plan as Windows 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 

8, 9, 10, 11 and what are now Doors 12 and 18. The 

original doors are identified on the following 

existing floor plan as Doors 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, and 15. 

Also, there was once a door on the original 

southeast wall of Room 101. It is believed that the 

location of this door mirrored that of Door 15 on 

Room 108. 

The original structure had a brick pier foundation 

and was constructed of a hewn timber frame infilled 

with bousillage. The characteristics of the framing 

provide evidence for the configuration of rooms. 

The floor joists beneath existing Rooms 101, 102, 103, 

104, 108 and 109 are all oriented in the same 

direction, northeast to southwest, and are of similar 

dimensions. Originally, the joists were hewn 

members, and many of these still exist. They are 

framed into beams that support the northeast and 

southwest walls of Rooms 102, 103 and 104. The floor 

framing for the original Rooms 101 and 108 flanks 

that of Room 102, with joists oriented in the same 

direction, northeast to southwest, and framed into 

heavy beams. The depth of the double- sided 

fireplace foundation beneath Rooms 102 and 103 is 

approximately equal to the spacing between three 

floor joists, suggesting that the fireplace was 

constructed at the same time as the original framing.

FIGURE 2. Original Floor Plan Configuration: Second 

Theory. Drawing excerpted from Ali Miri’s 1997 Historic 

Structure Assessment Report for the Overseer’s House/Slave 

Hospital at Magnolia Plantation.
National Park Service 19

Part I: Developmental History

The floor joists for the original northeast and 

southwest gallery are perpendicular to those of the 

interior rooms, running northwest to southeast, and 

are framed into heavy beams. The floor joists for the 

original southeast gallery run parallel to those of the 

interior rooms and are also framed into heavy 

beams. Some of the walls in the present- day Rooms 

101, 102, 103, 104, 108 and 109 are constructed of 

bousillage. Those that are not are the walls 

constructed for later additions to the building, 

namely the extension of Room 101 and the creation 

of Room 109. An exception to this is the wall 

between Rooms 103 and 104, which is of bousillage 

construction. This wall is considered to be one of 

the earliest modifications to the original floor plan 

and likely dates to when the Hertzog’s first 

occupied the building as their residence. 

In addition to the bousillage and timber frame, 

Barbara Yocum’s Materials Analysis of the original 

building materials identified hand- made brick 

foundation piers, mill- sawn lumber, machine- cut, 

shear- pointed nails, wood shingles, and tongueand- groove, board- and- batten doors and 

shutters. Yocum reports that the mill- sawn lumber, 

machine- cut nails, and tongue- and- groove boards 

date the original structure to circa 1840. This report 

also states that original exterior and interior wood 

wallboard and bousillage were whitewashed, while 

the original ceiling and floorboards, as well as 

woodwork trim, doors, and shutters were 

unfinished.

Early Changes

There are several possibilities regarding how the 

floor plan of the Overseer’s House evolved after the 

initial construction phase. According to oral history, 

the Hertzog family moved into the Slave Hospital in 

1864 after the Main House was burned to the 

ground by retreating Federal forces. At this time, the 

building likely underwent several modifications to 

convert it for use as a residence. It has been 

proposed that the wall, door, and fireplace between 

Rooms 103 and 104, the fireplace mantles in Rooms 

102 and 103, the window and transom sashes in the 

original window and door openings, and the 

staircase leading to the attic were among the first 

additions to the building, occurring circa 1864 or 

shortly thereafter.26 Through physical and material 

analysis, it is possible to narrow the time frame in 

which most of these changes occurred. 

FIGURE 3. Probable Original Floor Plan Configuration. Drawing excerpted 

from Ali Miri’s 1997 Historic Structure Assessment Report for the Overseer’s 

House/Slave Hospital at Magnolia Plantation

26. Yocum states that the mantles appear to have been 

salvaged from another building, perhaps the 

destroyed original Main House, and that it is likely 

that the mantle originally added to the fireplace in 

Room 104 was also salvaged. By the time of this 

report, this mantle was missing.
20 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Chronology of Development and Use

Ali Miri’s work, coupled with Barbara Yocum’s 

findings, supports the theory that the earliest 

modification to the building was the addition of the 

bousillage walls between Rooms 103 and 104 and 

along a portion of the northeastern gallery. The 

addition of the wall between existing Rooms 103 and 

104 likely included the construction of the brick 

fireplace and Door 10 on the northwest wall of 

existing Room 104. The supporting evidence for the 

age of the two added bousillage walls is the labor -

intensiveness of their construction and a physical 

analysis of the materials. Bousillage construction 

requires a significant amount of manual labor and is 

rarely seen in buildings constructed after the Civil 

War. Additionally, Yocum’s analysis of the added 

bousillage walls revealed the same mixture of redclay and Spanish moss that composed the original 

bousillage structure of the building. While the wall 

constructed to divide Rooms 103 and 104 was likely 

to provide a more functional residential floor plan, 

the purpose of the wall constructed along a portion 

of the northeastern elevation of the gallery adjacent 

to the added attic stairs is uncertain. This bousillage

wall may have been constructed to provide some 

shelter to the staircase leading to the attic, though 

this configuration is an odd one for the location and 

conditions at the gallery edge.

Barbara Yocum’s Materials Analysis identified grayblue paint on the stairs and the ceiling boards of the 

entire original gallery as well as on the punkah, the 

ceiling fan, that is mounted to the ceiling joists in 

Room 106, which was originally part of the gallery. 

This paint was identified as the earliest finish on 

these features. Because the gray- blue paint was 

common to these areas, Yocum asserts that it was 

applied prior to the enclosure of the gallery, as later 

finish layers on these features show color 

differences indicative of separate spaces. It appears 

that the stairs to the attic were constructed prior to 

the enclosure of the original gallery but not as part 

of the original construction of the building. 

Evidence supporting the claim that the staircase was 

not original to the building is in the attic floor 

framing. As noted in Miri’s report, examination of 

the attic floor at the stairwell revealed that a portion 

of an existing floor joist was removed to create the 

opening. Door 13b, located at the top of the first run 

of attic stairs, would likely have been installed at this 

time. Of particular note is the inscription, "M. Hel 

March – 1868" written in pencil on the interior 

southeast wall of the attic staircase along the second 

run of stairs. While the inscription appears to be 

legitimate, its age has not been scientifically 

confirmed. In addition, it is possible that Door 14, 

located beneath the second run of attic stairs, was 

also constructed and installed at this time. 

The next apparent evolution in the floor plan of the 

Overseer’s House included the extension of the 

earlier Room 101 and the creation of existing Rooms 

105 and 106. While it is unknown whether all of 

these modifications were made concurrently, it is 

probable that they are later than the bousillage wall 

and staircase additions based upon the physical 

characteristics of the materials used in their 

construction. Yocum identified circular- sawn 

framing and specific finishes as well as machine- cut 

nails in the extension of Room 101 and the creation 

of Rooms 105 and 106. The use of circular- sawn 

lumber reveals an evolution from the timber framing 

of the original walls. However, the presence of 

machine- cut nails indicates that these rooms were 

likely added before 1885. Room 101 was extended to 

incorporate part of the southwest gallery. The 

original southwest and southeast bousillage walls of 

Room 101 were altered. The southwest wall was 

extended with circular- sawn framing and finished 

on the interior with circular- sawn, butt- jointed 

boards. The original southeast wall was removed, 

and a new, circular- sawn, frame wall was 

constructed. This wall was also finished with 

circular- sawn, butt- jointed boards on the interior 

as well as the exterior and included a new door to 

the southeast gallery. The creation of Room 106 

FIGURE 4. Existing floor plan, 2003.
National Park Service 21

Part I: Developmental History

included a circular- sawn, framed addition to the 

bousillage wall on the northeast side of the gallery 

and a circular- sawn, framed wall spanning the 

depth of the northeast gallery. The addition to the 

bousillage wall was finished with circular- sawn, 

butt- jointed boards on the interior and included a 

door to the exterior. The framing for the southeast 

wall was originally exposed on the interior of the 

room and finished with butt- jointed boards on the 

exterior. Room 105 was created by enclosing a 

portion of the northeast gallery extending from the 

southeast wall of Room 106 to that of Room 104. 

The northeast and southeast walls of Room 105 

were constructed of circular- sawn frames finished 

on the interior with butt- jointed boards. The 

exterior southeast wall of this room was also 

finished with butt- jointed boards. 

The expansion of Room 101 and addition of Rooms 

105 and 106 likely included the construction of 

Doors 1, 3, 4, 12, 13a and 14 and Windows 5 and 6. It 

is reasonable to assume that the window on the 

northeast wall of Room 104 was converted to a door 

at this time, providing access to Room 105. This is 

Door 12. The fireplace in Room 101 was likely also 

added at this time, given that its location on the 

northeast wall is in the approximate location of the 

original southeast wall of the room.

Exactly how and when Room 106 evolved is 

uncertain. As previously discussed, it appears the 

staircase leading to the attic and the bousillage wall 

were the first components of this room. The 

purpose of the open- ended bousillage wall is 

unresolved, however. While it is possible this wall 

was constructed as a means of protecting the 

staircase from the elements, it is also possible that it 

was constructed prior to the stairs. However, this 

latter theory does not seem reasonable, as there 

seems little purpose for constructing a single wall 

along the outer edge of the gallery, while leaving the 

balance of the gallery exposed to the elements. 

Nonetheless, it is reasonable to assert that the two 

features were built around the same time, circa 1864. 

Another ambiguous aspect of Room 106 is the 

relationship of the door opening in its northeast 

wall, identified as Door 3, to the gallery of the 

southeastern wing addition, identified as Room 111, 

located immediately southeast of the main building. 

Ali Miri and Barbara Yocum have identified this 

wing, along with the Room 110 wing, as having been 

added to the Overseer’s House circa 1880. The 

rationale behind this theory is the use of some 

building materials that were commonly used until 

circa 1885, specifically machine- cut nails. However, 

machine- cut nails were manufactured between the 

FIGURE 5. Left, original floor plan, c. 1840; right, phase one addition before 

1885.

101 102 108

103/104

D20 D21

W15

W14

111

* No longer extant

W2 W4

D2

W3

D7 D9

W10

D*

D6

D8 D15

W11

D11

D5W8 W7

W9 W*

W1 W* 102

D5

103/104

* No longer extant

W8

W9

D6

W2

W1 101 D7

W10

D* D8

D2

W7

D11

W*

W4

D9 108

W11

D15

W3

W*
22 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Chronology of Development and Use

1830s and 1880s and even beyond and have been 

identified in other areas of the main building that 

predate the addition of these wings. Physical 

examination, as well as logical reasoning, suggests 

that the Room 111 wing was constructed at another 

location on the plantation for an independent use 

and later relocated to the Overseer’s House to 

support its residential functions. Some time after the 

relocation of the Room 111 wing, Room 110 was 

constructed as an addition off Room 108. The 

primary clue to this scenario is the location of the 

buildings in relationship to one another. The 

buildings are very close together, yet not attached to 

one another, with only Room 110 permanently 

attached to the main building. The close proximity 

of the two buildings suggests that, some time after 

Room 111 was relocated to its current location, as the 

need for additional living and/or storage space 

arose, Room 110 was constructed within the balance 

of the space remaining between the northwest walls 

of Room 111 and the main building. Constructing a 

wing at this location provided additional interior 

space in a way that did not detract from the primary 

facades (southwest and southeast) of the building as 

it relates to the other plantation buildings. 

Additionally, as Ali Miri’s report identifies, the 

original northwest window in Room 108 was 

converted to Door 18, providing access between the 

Room 110 wing and the main house. The southwest 

wall of Room 110 is the northeast exterior wall of 

Rooms 108 and 109 in the main building. 

As illustrated in the 1986 Historic American Building 

Survey (HABS) drawings completed for the 

Overseer’s House, Room 111 was, at one time, 

attached to the main building via the gallery along its 

southeast elevation. It is this physical connection to 

the main house at Door 3 that seems odd. The 

anomaly lies with the angle at which the bridge 

between the main building and the Room 111 wing 

was built to accommodate access to Door 3. If the 

presumption that the Room 111 wing was added to 

the main house around 1880 is correct, the gallery 

would have had to have been constructed with this 

angle to access the opening of Door 3. However, it is 

unclear why the Room 111 wing would have been 

located so far back from Door 3, considering the 

subsequent requirement of constructing the gallery 

with the odd connecting angle. It is possible that 

Door 3 originally opened to a flight of stairs leading 

to the ground and that, rather than cut a new 

opening in the northeast bousillage wall of Room 106 

when attaching the Room 111 wing to the main 

building, it was deemed easier to build Room 111 

further back and connect it with the gallery in a way 

that would avoid the stairs. However, these 

speculations fail to explain why the simplest of 

options, locating the wing addition further to the 

FIGURE 6. Left, phase two addition, 1864-1885; right, phase three addition, 

1870-1885.

101 102 108

103

104

D10

D14 D13b

107 111

* No longer extant

W2 W4

D2

W3

D7 D9

W10

D*

D6

D8 D15

W11

D11

W8 D5 W7

W9 W*

W1 W*

D20 D21

W15

W14

D1

D12

D13a D3

D4

W5

W6

111

101 102 108

103

104

107

106

105

* No longer extant

D10

D14 D13b

W2 W4

D2

W3

D7 D9

W10

D6

D8 D15

W11

D11

W8 D5 W7

W9

W1 W*

D20 D21

W15

W14
National Park Service 23

Part I: Developmental History

southeast and nearer to Door 3, was not 

implemented. Instead of being constructed at its 

present location, if the Room 111 wing was 

constructed elsewhere and later moved to its 

current location, there is the possibility that, when 

the Room 111 wing addition was first relocated to the 

Overseer’s House, it was not connected directly to 

the building for purposes of safety. Miri states that 

its original function at the Overseer’s House was as 

a kitchen. It was common to locate detached 

kitchens near residential structures and connect 

them to the main structure with a porch or walk that 

could be quickly destroyed to reduce the risk of fire 

damage to the main structure in case of a fire in the 

kitchen structure. Given these considerations, it 

appears probable that the Room 111 wing was 

relocated to its current position prior to the 

construction of the stairs and the bousillage wall that 

currently serves as a portion of the northeast wall of 

Room 106. As discussed above, the wing was built 

using machine cut nails. Furthermore, while it is not 

a bousillage building, its frame was constructed of 

hand- hewn, sash- sawn and circular- sawn lumber. 

Given the prevalent use of bousillage in antebellum, 

Creole building construction, it is likely that this 

building was either constructed about the time of 

the Civil War or its original use did not require the 

insulating properties of bousillage. If it was 

constructed after the Civil War, how soon after is 

unknown. In light of the relationship of the wing to 

the main building, its possible use as a secondary 

structure, and its building materials, the possibility 

that it predates the other additions to the original 

slave hospital floor plan should not be discounted.

The inclusion of the Room 110 and 111 wings 

incorporated several new doors and windows into 

the floor plan, including the alteration of at least one 

existing opening, as previously mentioned. These 

additions included Doors 3, 18, 19, 20 and 21 and 

Windows 12, 13, 14 and 15. Physical evidence in the 

wall structure above Door 18 indicates that it was 

likely converted from an original window opening.

Another interesting clue regarding how the building 

may have expanded is in the southeast wall of Room 

106. Given the exposed interior and finished 

exterior conditions of this wall, the possibility exists 

that Room 106 may have been built prior to and 

independent of Room 105, with the southeast wall 

serving as an exterior wall to the gallery rather than 

as a dividing wall between the two rooms. However, 

as previously mentioned, it is possible that they 

were built concurrently, given the apparent age of 

the building materials. As the original use of Room 

106 is unknown, it is difficult to definitively identify 

the reason for leaving the southeast wall framing 

exposed to the interior. In light of its size, and given 

the presence of the staircase, it is possible the room 

may have simply served as a hall or "staging area" 

for other rooms; for instance, it could have been 

used as a "butler’s pantry." If considering the 

possibility that the Room 111 wing was relocated 

adjacent to the Overseer’s House for use as a 

FIGURE 7. Left, phase four addition, 1870-1885; right, phase five addition, 

c. 1920.

111

101 102

103

104

107

106

105

D18

W12 W13

110

111

101 102

108

103

104

107

106

105

110

109

* No longer extant * No longer extant

D1

D12

D13a D3

D4

W5

W6

106

D10

D14 D13b

W2 W4

D2

W3

D7 D9

W10

D6

D8

D15

W11

D11

W8 D5 W7

W9

W1

D20 D21

W15

W14

D18

W12 W13

D1

D12

D13a D3

D4

W5

W6

D10

D14 D13b

W2 W4

D2

W3

D7 D9

W10

D6

D8 D15

W11

D11

W8 D5 W7

W9

W1

D20 D21

W15

W14

D17

D19 D19
24 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Chronology of Development and Use

kitchen, the use of Room 106 as a pantry or the like is 

plausible. It may have served as a pass- through from 

the kitchen to the dining room, possibly located in 

Room 103 or Room 105, both of which had direct 

access to Room 106. However, it should be strongly 

noted that this use is conjectural. 

Barbara Yocum’s 1996 Materials Analysis asserts that 

the punkah in Room 105 likely dates to when the 

building was first converted for use as a residence, if 

not earlier. As discussed previously in this section, 

the earliest paint layer identified on the punkah is 

gray- blue in color, the same as that identified as the 

earliest ceiling finish in Room 105 and the original 

exposed galleries and staircase. Yocum attributes a 

date of circa 1860s to this paint layer. The gray- blue 

paint was also identified on the balance of the 

gallery ceiling and, therefore, was likely applied 

prior to the creation of Room 105. According to the 

Materials Analysis, after 1870, the subsequent layers 

of paint on the ceiling of the open gallery and that of 

Room 105 differ. This finding is consistent with Ali 

Miri’s theory of how and when the floor plan of the 

building evolved. Yocum notes that the punkah may 

have been installed when the building served as a 

slave hospital, and simply remained unfinished until 

circa 1860s. It is also possible that the punkah was 

installed after 1864, when the building was first used 

as a residence. In this scenario, the gray- blue paint 

would likely have been applied immediately, which 

would also date it to the latter part of the 1860s. 

The exterior walls of the main building in the 

Overseer’s House not protected by the galleries 

were finished with board siding at some point. 

Barbara Yocum has identified this material as having 

been flush- board. However, the use of flushboards as an independent exterior finish is 

problematic given their inappropriateness for 

providing adequate moisture protection for the 

underlying wall structure and subsequent interior 

finishes. The lack of an overlap in the joint offers 

little to no protection from rain; therefore, lapped 

siding was most often used when horizontal wood 

siding was the exterior finish of choice. A circa 1950 

photograph of the building shows board siding on 

the southwest exterior walls of the building not 

covered by the gallery. However, the clarity of the 

photograph is insufficient to plainly identify the 

type of siding, whether butt- jointed or lapped, that 

covers the wall. However, the apparent width of the 

boards in the photograph is smaller than that 

identified in Barbara Yocum’s analysis. A 

photograph included in Yocum’s analysis reveals 

boards installed flush with one another with traces 

of an earlier whitewash finish. In this photograph, 

shadow lines along the top edges of the boards are 

evident, suggesting that the boards were, at one 

point, installed as lapped siding, finished with 

whitewash, and later reinstalled as flush- board 

siding. This scenario is plausible given the 

subsequent exterior siding used on the building. 

20th Century 

Changes

Prior to its removal in 1998, a rolled, asphalt siding 

covered the exterior walls of the main building and 

wings not protected by the galleries. This siding still 

exists on the building wings. According to Ali Miri, 

George Lynn, the plantation overseer from 1959 to 

1961, completed a series of renovations on the house. 

One of these renovations was the installation of the 

asphalt siding. If the building had been finished with 

lapped siding at the time of the circa 1959- 1961 

renovations, it is reasonable to suggest that the 

boards were removed and reinstalled with flush 

joints to provide a smooth surface over which the 

asphalt siding could be applied. Furthermore, 

Yocum identified unused nail holes in the flush 

board siding, supporting the theory that the boards 

had been reused. The interior southwest wall of 

Room 110, which was originally part of the northeast 

exterior wall of the main building, is finished with 

both lapped and flush board siding. Despite the 

presence of flush- board siding on this wall, the use 

of lapped siding in this location further supports the 

belief that it was used elsewhere on the exterior 

walls. The interior southwest wall of Room 110 was 

reconfigured at some point to create Door 18, which 

was converted from an original window in this 

location. It is likely that this door was created when 

Room 110 was constructed and the flush- board 

finish was applied to sections of the wall, as the 

interior use of the space made the need for lapped 

siding in this location unnecessary. A circa 1940 

photograph of the building illustrates two dormers 

along the southwest elevation of the roof of the main 

building. The siding on these dormers is clearly 

clapboard. According to Ali Miri, George Lynn 

reported that the dormers were added to the roof 

structure sometime around 1930 and were removed 

prior to his occupation of the house. Therefore, the 
National Park Service 25

Part I: Developmental History

clapboard finish on the dormers was a later addition 

to the house and does not necessarily identify the 

exterior siding on the rest of the house circa 1930. 

However, all other evidence supports that the 

exterior walls of the main building not protected by 

the galleries were historically finished with lapped 

siding prior to circa 1959.

A photograph dating to circa 1940 illustrates the 

presence of simple brackets located at the top of the 

gallery columns just below the eave. While it is 

unknown exactly when these brackets were added 

to the house, they were likely a nineteenth century 

improvement added as a decorative feature after the 

building was converted for use as a residence. In 

addition to these features, screened doors were 

installed in some of the door openings. The 

decorative wood framing for these doors consists of 

turned spindles and rails, filigree corner brackets, 

and other millwork. Given their style, it is likely that 

these screened doors also date to the nineteenth or 

early twentieth century.

A bathroom was added to the Overseer’s House at 

some point in the twentieth century. The plumbing 

fixtures appear identical in style to those identified 

in The Cottage at Oakland Plantation. These 

fixtures have been dated to the late 1920s. Given the 

similarity between the fixtures at the Cottage at 

Oakland Plantation and the Overseer’s House at 

Magnolia Plantation, it is likely that Room 109 of the 

Overseer’s House was constructed for use as a 

bathroom sometime after the mid- 1920s.

Personal interviews conducted for this analysis, as 

well as information provided in Ali Miri’s and 

Barbara Yocum’s reports and in historic 

photographs, have provided significant information 

on several of the other twentieth- century 

improvements to the building. In addition to the 

installation of the asphalt siding, there were other 

upgrades completed when George Lynn and his 

family occupied the house between 1959 and 1961. 

These included the addition of:

■ gypsum board covering the majority of the 

interior walls

■ a closet in Room 108 (Door 16) 

■ the existing overlaying wood floor 

throughout the interior

■ the kitchen cabinets in Room 105. 

During the Lynn family’s occupation of the house, 

the Room 111 wing was used as a laundry room. 

According to Ali Miri, George Lynn referred to this 

room as the "kitchen." It is likely that he was 

referring to the historic use of the wing, as he and 

his family were using Room 105 as a kitchen during 

their tenure at Magnolia. Historic documentation 

dates the gas water heater located in Room 105 to 

1948. While it is known that the existing kitchen 

cabinets and sink were added to the room between 

1959 and 1961, it is unknown what type of kitchen 

fixtures existed prior to that time. 

The only other modern addition to Room 105 was 

the flooring. Barbara Yocum identified three layers 

of asphaltic- type rolled flooring installed over the 

original wood floorboards. According to Yocum, 

this flooring was manufactured as early as the 1930s 

and was marketed as "Congoleum." Three layers 

indicate three separate periods of replacement of 

the flooring between the 1930s and the date the last 

overseer left the plantation.

Other additions to the house include electrical and 

gas service. According to historic documentation, 

electricity first came to the Cane River area in 1938. 

Therefore, the existing lighting fixtures throughout 

the house were likely added shortly after this 

period. However, it is possible that some of the 

fixtures were added later. Specifically, some of the 

FIGURE 8. Phase six addition, 1959-1961.

111

101 102

108

103

104

107

106

105

110

108A

109

* No longer extant

D18

W12 W13

D1

D12

D13a D3

D4

W5

W6

D10

D14 D13b

W2 W4

D2

W3

D7 D9

W10

D6

D8 D15

W11

D11

W8 D5 W7

W9

W1

D20 D21

W15

W14

D17

D19

D16
26 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Chronology of Development and Use

lighting may date to the period in which the George 

Lynn family occupied the house, considering the 

extensive upgrades that were introduced between 

1959 and 1961.

Evolution of the 

Main Roof 

Structure

The main building roof structure of the Overseer’s 

House is notable, and, like the floor plan, its early 

evolution is somewhat ambiguous. The roof profile 

is hipped. Knee walls support the rafters at 

approximately the outside third of the span between 

the ridge and the upper plate at the porch column 

line. Connected to the bottom of the ridge beam are 

four, square, sawn and planed posts with diagonal 

mortise- and- tenon bracing. The bracing is aligned 

with the ridge beam. The two end posts have bracing 

on either side of the post and are known as king 

posts. What is interesting about these posts is that 

they are sawn off just below the diagonal bracing 

and, therefore, do not bear on anything. The planed 

finish of the posts suggests that, when fabricated, 

they were intended to be visible. The detail in the 

joinery and finish also suggest that the posts were 

meant to be permanent, rather than temporary 

support during construction. However, the posts 

were cut off at some point, obviously indicating that

they were abandoned for any structural use. 

Examination of traditional roof building techniques 

in Creole architecture sheds light on the Overseer’s 

House roof structure. As explained by Edward J. 

Cazayoux in The Climatic Adaptation of French 

Colonial Architecture into the Louisiana Raised 

Cottage, the evolution of Creole architecture stems 

from traditional European building techniques 

responding to the regional and climatic variations of 

Louisiana and the introduction of Native American 

influences. A common feature of early French 

Colonial roof systems was the use of braced posts 

supporting the ridge beam. The vertical posts 

provided support to the ridge beam, while the 

diagonal braces provided lateral support to the 

vertical posts. However, this type of roof framing 

assembly was more of a truss type configuration 

where the center post is a king post component of a 

king truss. The king post would have to have a 

horizontal member on which to bear that would 

accept the roof load that the king post carries. The 

braced, cut off, and suspended posts found in the 

Overseer’s House at Magnolia are configured in this 

manner. However, there is no evidence of a suitable 

horizontal framing member in the attic floor 

structure on which the king posts could rest and 

upon which to transfer their roof load.

Another traditional feature of Creole architecture 

was the gable- on- hip and dual- pitched hip roof 

structure, in which either a gabled or a hipped roof 

structure covered the interior rooms of a building, 

and a lean- to roof sheltered an open gallery. The 

lean- to roof was usually a low- pitched shed roof 

that wrapped the sides of a building, connecting at 

the corners or "hips" of the roof structure. As 

Cazayoux explains, modifications were made over 

time to these roof assemblies, in particular to the 

low- pitched, lean- to roofs that covered the 

galleries. These modifications were in response to 

leaking that occurred at the joints between the two 

roof assemblies. The modifications often involved 

raising the rafters in the gallery roof to a steeper 

pitch and lowering the pitch of the main structure’s 

roof framing, thus eliminating the joint between the 

two roof structures. Eventually, it became 

commonplace to see hipped roofs with a single pitch 

from the ridge to the outside of the gallery. 

The history of the truncated, braced posts in the 

roof of the Overseer’s House is puzzling. It is 

possible that the builders decided to change the roof 

framing sometime during construction. The type of 

FIGURE 9. Example of early Europeaninfluenced, provincial Louisiana roof structure. 

Illustration courtesy of Edward J. Cazayoux’s 

The Climatic Adaptation of French Colonial 

Architecture into the Louisiana Raised Cottage.
National Park Service 27

Part I: Developmental History

post exhibited by the sawed- off posts would have 

been used to construct the traditional, early, Creole, 

hip- on- hip roof structure. It is plausible that, 

originally, the builders planned on constructing 

such a roof on the Overseer’s House (at the time, 

likely the slave hospital) and decided to change the 

roofing assembly due to the potential leaking issues 

and the greater acceptance of the single- pitch roof 

profile. In addition, the general configuration of the 

Overseer’s House is not typical. Its configuration is 

longer and narrower than either a typical main 

plantation house or a more modest Creole cottage. 

Consequently, the builders may have begun 

building expecting to use the traditional Creole 

cottage construction type only to find that the 

framing, chimney locations, and bearing wall 

placements conflicted with that scheme. As 

previously discussed, there is no evidence of a 

suitable horizontal framing member in the attic 

floor structure on which the king posts could rest 

and upon which to transfer their roof load. In fact, 

the king posts are not in direct alignment with any 

framing member of the attic floor. Therefore, absent 

any evidence that the attic floor structure was 

completely reconstructed, the original intended 

function of the king posts remains unclear.

The possibility that the roof structure was 

reconstructed at some point in the building’s 

history was considered. The physical details of the 

roof were examined for evidence of reconstruction. 

While a portion of the roof structure has been 

replaced by a National Park Service contractor, the 

ridge beam into which both the king posts and the 

rafters frame appears original. If the roof structure 

had been reconstructed at some point to achieve a 

change in design, the ridge beam would likely have 

been replaced to achieve the new configuration.

While the king posts were obviously retained 

despite their lack of use, and at some point 

truncated to avoid their bearing on inadequate 

framing, the ridge beam would not have been 

retained. Therefore, it does not appear that the roof 

structure was entirely reconstructed to a new design 

early in the building history.

The more modern design of a single- pitched, 

hipped roof was implemented. Such a design 

required the use of knee- walls to provide mid- span 

support to the rafters; the braced posts supporting 

the ridge beam then became unnecessary. The 

likelihood that this scenario is correct is further 

supported by the observation that, with the early 

traditional hip- on- hip roof structure, the original 

Rooms 101, 102 and 108 would be sheltered by the 

shed roof, and the joint between the two roof 

systems would be located over these rooms. This 

would increase the impact of potential leakage 

issues. Instead of rainwater leaking into an open 

gallery, under the hip- on- hip roof structure, it 

would have been be leaking into interior rooms. 

The change to a single- pitch roof prevented that 

leakage.

Given the lack of documentation on the evolution 

of the original roof construction, it is difficult to 

definitively identify why the braced posts were 

planed, constructed, and installed in such a 

permanent manner only to be then sawn off and, 

FIGURE 10. Example of early Creole Cottage roof framing. Noted that this design was later 

modified due to its potential for leaking. Illustration courtesy of Edward J. Cazayoux’s The 

Climatic Adaptation of French Colonial Architecture into the Louisiana Raised Cottage.
28 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Chronology of Development and Use

thereby, rendered non- functional. While it is 

possible that the history of these posts is different 

from that hypothesized in this report, it seems 

unlikely that they were originally installed with the 

intention of being temporary construction support. 

Given that they are planed members and are joined 

with pegs and mortise- and- tenon connections, all 

evidence suggests that they were originally 

constructed and installed as permanent structural 

reinforcement. As such, they are a unique feature of 

the roof system that add to the historic character of 

the building. Furthermore, these posts are 

significant to the overall understanding of advances 

in building technology in historic Creole 

architecture.

As previously mentioned, the original roofing was 

wood shingles. Prior to the 1940s, the shingle 

roofing was either replaced or covered by 5V- metal 

panels, as shown in a circa 1940 photograph of the 

Overseer’s House. While this is the earliest 

photograph of the house available at the time of this 

report, it is unknown when the metal roofing was 

applied to the building, and whether it replaced or 

merely covered the earlier wood shingle roof.

As previously discussed, there were, at one time, 

two dormers located on the southwest elevation of 

the main building roof. Both the circa 1940 and circa 

1950 photographs document the presence of these 

dormers. In the circa 1940 photograph, the dormers 

were finished with clapboard siding on the exterior, 

had gabled roofs, and board- and- batten shutters 

with strap hinges. Though the dormers were 

reportedly removed prior to 1959, Barbara Yocum 

identified evidence of their framing in the roof 

structure during her 1996 analysis of the building. A 

National Park Service contractor removed all 

evidence of this framing between 1996 and 1998 

during their stabilization work on the roof.

In 1998, the National Park Service completed a 

scope of stabilization modifications. In response to 

the poor condition of the building, some 

deteriorated historic materials were replaced. To 

document this work, the National Park Service 

prepared a Design Analysis for the Overseer’s House 

in November 2002. This analysis outlines the work 

undertaken on the structure by the National Park 

Service and Park Service contractors. The work 

included replacing the 5V- galvanized metal roofing 

on the main building, repairing the roofing on the 

two additions, and removing the asphalt siding on 

the main building and replacing it with clapboard 

siding. The rafters in the gallery roof were repaired, 

the gallery roof sheathing was replaced, the gallery 

floor framing was reinforced through the 

installation of new framing members, including the 

sill beam, and the gallery columns and trim were 

repaired. All but one of the brick foundation piers at 

the perimeter edge of the main building were 

rebuilt. In addition, the piers beneath the two 

additions were rebuilt.

Use

The Slave Hospital/Overseer’s House has served 

three distinct phases of use since it was first 

constructed in the 1840s. The first use appears to 

have been as a Slave Hospital. Documentary and 

material evidence indicates that this was the use for 

which the structure was built. Despite the size and 

substantial construction of the building, the 

existence of mortises for bars in the framing of the 

windows of this part of the original structure does 

not suggest a residential use. The original large room 

on the southeast would be appropriate to use as a 

sick ward. Overseer Eddins reported to Ambrose 

LeComte II on March 26, 1851, that he had locked 

”Dannial the Black Smith from Armsteads side” in 

“one end of the Hospittle” when he became ill from 

“eating ashes plentifully.”27 The letter indicates that 

the Slave Hospital was not only in existence in 1851, 

it was on the same side of the river as the current 

Overseer’s House (“Armsteads side” was the 

Shallow Lake side of Cane River, opposite Magnolia 

Plantation), and that it had a means to restrain 

inhabitants to that they could not get out of the 

building. The use of the term "one end" of the Slave 

Hospital also indicates more than one room in the 

building, which the framing and materials reveal was 

the case. James Hamilton Couper described the 

hospital he built for his slaves on his Georgia 

plantation, Hopeton, in 1833 for the Southern 

Agriculturist as being a four- ward structure with 

two wards for men, one ward for women, and one 

ward for lying- in women.28 This description 

appears similar to the arrangement used at the Slave 

Hospital at Magnolia Plantation, which also held 

27. Keel, p. 86.

28. John Michael Vlach, Back of the Big House – The 

Architecture of Plantation Slavery. Chapel Hill, NC: 

The University of North Carolina Press, 1993, p. 145.
National Park Service 29

Part I: Developmental History

four rooms. It is unlikely that the three southwest 

rooms were used as a residence for a doctor: letters 

from overseer Eddins in 1851 indicate that Dr. 

Scruggs was called to the plantation as necessary 

but did not live on site. It is more likely that the 

three smaller rooms were ward rooms.

The second use of the structure was as a residence 

for the owners of the plantation. After the Main 

House was burned by retreating Federal forces 

during the Red River Campaign of the Civil War, 

Mathew and Atala Hertzog, who owned 40% of the 

plantation at that time and managed it for Atala’s 

father, Ambrose LeComte II, moved into what was 

then the Slave Hospital and converted it to their use 

as a residence. The original intent was to remain 

there until the Main House could be rebuilt. This 

did not occur, however, for thirty years, until 1893. 

The Hertzogs made several additions and 

improvements to the building during that time. 

These additions and improvements are detailed in 

the Chronology of Development portion of this 

report.

The third phase of use for the building occurred 

between 1893 and the mid- 1960s. During this 

period, the Hertzog’s used the building as housing 

for overseers and farm managers for Magnolia 

Plantation. Overseers who lived on the premises 

and doubtless inhabited the Overseer’s House 

during this time included Edmond Delacorda, F. M. 

Rouget, Henry and Leslie Gallien, Telese Rachal, 

Floyd Thompson, George Lynn, and Mr. Arledge. 

Although it is possible to extrapolate a general time

period that each of these men served as overseer for 

Magnolia Plantation from existing records, the 

exact dates of their service are unclear except for 

George Lynn, who lived in the Overseer’s House 

between 1959 and 1961. It was during his occupancy 

that many of the existing upgrades to the structure 

were installed. Information regarding the additions 

and improvements made to the structure during this 

period can be found in the Chronology of 

Development portion of this report.

After the last overseer moved out in the mid- 1960s, 

the Overseer’s House fell into disuse and, 

eventually, disrepair. The Hertzogs, attempting to 

save this structure and others at Magnolia 

Plantation from complete collapse, donated the 

property on which the Overseer’s House stands to a 

local non- profit corporation, Museum Contents, 

Inc. in 1976 with the understanding that this group 

would locate a suitable owner for the property that 

would work to preserve and restore it. According to 

Betty Hertzog, Museum Contents, Inc. did not 

undertake any stabilization or preservation work on 

the Overseer’s House while the house was in its 

possession. In 1979, the Overseer’s House was listed 

in the National Register of Historic Places. In 1996, 

the Overseer’s House became the property of the 

National Park Service as part of a new park, the 

Cane River Creole National Historical Park. As part 

of the park, the Overseer’s House enters into its 

fourth phase of use as a visual aid in the 

interpretation of the continuum of plantation life 

from the early part of the nineteenth century to the 

later part of the twentieth.
30 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Chronology of Development and Use
National Park Service 31

The Overseer’s House is a bousillage and heavy 

timber structure on a brick pier foundation. 

Originally constructed in the typical Louisiana 

Creole style, the building has a hipped roof and a 

rectangular floor plan. Two wing additions are 

located on the northeast elevation of the building, 

one of which is detached. The main building has an 

integral gallery on part of the southwest elevation 

and extending the full length of the southeast 

elevation. There are nine rooms in the main portion 

of the Overseer’s House, Rooms 101 through 109, 

and one room in each of the wing additions, Rooms 

110 and 111. Located above the main building is an 

attic space running the full length and width of the 

first floor. There are twenty- two doors, fifteen 

windows, and four fireplaces in the house. 

FIGURE 1. Southwest elevation, front entrance to 

Overseer’s House.

Physical 

Description
32 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

Structural System

Foundation

Brick piers support the structure of the main 

building and the two additions at the perimeter 

beams and interior girts. While the piers vary in 

both size and height, they generally measure 18” by 

13”, 27” by 18” and 27” by 22”, and most are between 

40” and 45” tall. The piers supporting the exterior 

corners of the main building and the two additions 

are L- shaped with one exception. Supporting the 

southern corner of the Room 110 addition, pier 44 is 

rectangular. According to the Design Analysis 

completed for the Overseer’s House, the foundation 

piers along the perimeter of the main building were 

rebuilt during the stabilization work completed by 

contractors for the National Park Service in 1998. 

While most of the piers have a uniform appearance, 

there are a few variations. In several areas of the 

foundation, wood blocking exists between the floor 

framing and the brick piers. The blocking varies 

from one to two boards, and, in some cases, there is 

a 1” thick board cut to the dimensions of the pier 

beneath the blocking. Also, beneath the southwest 

sill of the Room 110 addition, there is a wood pier 

resting on a concrete foundation pad, which was 

presumably installed by the contractor for the 

National Park Service. Where the piers have been 

reconstructed, it is believed that the wood blocking 

is new material installed to replicate what 

historically existed between the piers and the floor 

beams. 

Additionally, there is a coating of plaster on the 

historic piers interior to the main building. This 

coating has deteriorated. However, overall, the piers 

are in sound condition, with no apparent structural 

deficiencies. The dimensions, characteristics, 

condition and spacing of the foundation piers are 

identified in the tables and diagrams on the 

following pages.

There are three brick fireplace foundations beneath 

the main building. One of these supports two 

fireplaces, one located in Room 102 and the other 

located in Room 103. This is the only fireplace 

foundation original to the building. The foundation 

supporting Fireplace 1 was apparently constructed 

when Room 104 was created through the addition of 

a bousillage wall separating it from Room 103. 

FIGURE 2. Foundation piers beneath southeast 

sill of southeast gallery.

FIGURE 3. Foundation piers beneath Room 

111 addition.

FIGURE 4. Odd pier beneath southwest sill of 

Room 110 addition.
National Park Service 33

Part I: Developmental History

Fireplace 4 was created when Room 101 was 

extended to the southeast. The fireplace 

foundations appear sound.

Chimneys

There are five brick chimneys on the Overseer’s 

House. Three chimneys are located on the main 

building, while the remaining two are on the wing 

additions. The chimneys on the main building serve 

fireplaces 1, 2, 3 and 4, which are located in Rooms 

104, 103, 102 and 101, respectively. Fireplaces 2 and 3 

share a common chimney, which has been encased 

in the attic and above the roof line in sheet metal. 

Presumably, National Park Service contractors 

completed this treatment at some point since 1998. 

According to photographs taken of the Overseer’s 

House prior to 1998, some of which are historic, this 

chimney had articulated brickwork along the top 

FIGURE 5. Location of brick piers and fireplace foundations.

FIGURE 8. Detail of wood blocking between 

pier and floor framing.
34 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

FIGURE 6. Summary description and condition of foundation piers.

Pier # Shape 

Outside 

Face 

Corner 

Face Height Finish 

Supplemental 

Wood Condition 

1 L-shaped 27" 18" 43" brick no good* 

2 Rectangular 26 1/2" 18" 44" brick no good* 

3 Rectangular 27" 18" 42 1/2" brick no 

good*-some slight 

spalling of brick face at 

top of pier 

4 Rectangular 26 3/4" 17 3/4" 43" brick no good* 

5 Rectangular 26 1/2" 22" 44" brick no good* 

6 Rectangular 26 1/2" 22" 44" brick no good* 

7 Rectangular 27" 18" 44" brick no good* 

8 Rectangular 26" 22" 44" brick no good* 

9 Rectangular 26" 17" 45" brick no good* 

10 Rectangular 27" 22" 45" brick no good* 

11 Rectangular 26" 17 1/2" 43 1/2" brick no good* 

12 Rectangular 27" 18" 40 1/2" brick no 

heavy mildew on 

northeast face* 

13 Rectangular 26 1/2" 18" 44" brick no 

mortar is slightly 

crumbly, some spalling -

overall, fair to good* 

14 Rectangular 27" 17" 43" brick no good* 

15 Rectangular 27" 17" 44" brick no good* 

16 Rectangular 26 1/2" 17" 46 1/2" brick no good* 

17 L-shaped 27" 18" 44 1/2" brick no good* 

18 Rectangular 27" 18" 44" brick no good* 

19 Rectangular 27" 18" 44" brick no good* 

20 Rectangular 26 1/2" 17 3/4" 42 1/4" brick no good* 

21 L-shaped 26 1/2" 17 1/2" 43" 

brick coated 

with plaster yes 

good - plaster is 

crumbling in places 

22 Rectangular 26 1/2" 17" 43" 

brick coated 

with plaster yes 

plaster is crumbling in 

places 

23 Rectangular 26 1/2" 18" 43" brick, plaster yes 

good - plaster is 

crumbling in places 

24 Rectangular 26 1/2" 17" 43 1/2" brick, plaster yes 

good, plaster is largely 

worn off 

25 Rectangular 13" 18" 40 1/2" brick, plaster yes 

good, plaster is largely 

worn off - some repair 

to mortar 

26 Rectangular 26 1/2" 17" 44" brick, plaster

yes, (two 

boards, 2 1/2" x 

5", 1 1/4" thick)

fair, plaster is largely 

worn off, some spalling 

of brick on inner portion

27 Rectangular 26" 17 1/2" 45" brick, plaster yes good 

28 Rectangular 26" 17" 46 1/2" brick, plaster yes good, some mildew 
National Park Service 35

Part I: Developmental History

Pier # 

Outside 

Face 

Corner 

Face Height Finish Supplemental Wood Condition 

29 26" 17 1/2" 45" 

brick, plaster, 

grey mortar on 

portions yes good 

30 17 1/2" 17" 45" brick yes 

brick footing 

underneath (17", 

23", 2") 

31 26" 18" 41 1/2" 

brick, plaster, 

some grey 

mortar yes 

good, plaster is 

crumbling in 

places. 

32 26 1/2" 17 1/2" 46" brick, plaster no 

good, plaster is 

crumbling in 

places 

33 17 1/2" 13" 43" brick no 

good, some 

crumbling on 

top of pier 

(exposed) 

34 17 1/2" 13" 43" brick no 

good, some 

spalling 

35 17 1/2" 13" 44 1/4" brick no 

good, some 

spalling 

36 17 1/2" 13" 41" brick no 

good, slight 

spalling at top 

37 17 1/2" 13" 40 1/2" brick no good 

38 17 1/2" 13" 42 3/4" brick no 

good, some 

spalling 

39 17 3/4" 13 1/2" 45" brick no good 

40 17 1/2" 13" 43" brick no good 

41 18" 13 1/2" 43 1/2" brick no good 

42 22 1/2" 13 1/2" 21 1/2" brick yes good 

43 22 1/2" 13 1/2" 17 1/2" brick yes good 

44 17" 13" 42" brick yes (one board 1 1/2" thick) good 

45 22 1/2" 13 1/2" 18 1/2" brick yes (one board 1 1/2" thick) 

good, some 

spalling 

46 22" 13" 19" brick 

yes (two boards 1/2", 1 1/2" 

thick good 

47 22" 13" 20" brick yes (one board 1 1/2" thick) good 

48 8" 8" 14 1/2" wood yes good to fair 

A 17" 17" 37" brick, plaster yes 

B 17 3/4" 17 1/2" 43 1/2" brick, plaster yes 

fair - some brick 

spalling at rear 

base 
36 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

FIGURE 7. Position of piers beneath main building.

Span Length 

P1 - P2 8'-2" 

P2 - P3 7'-9" 

P3 - P4 8'-2" 

P4 - P5 8'-3" 

P5 - P6 8'-3" 

P6 - P7 8'-2" 

P7 - P8 7'-11" 

P8 - P9 7'-11" 

P9 - P10 8'-3" 

P10 - P11 8'-3 1/2" 

P11 - P12 8'-5" 

P12 - P13 8' 

P13 - P14 8'-1" 

P14 - P15 7'-9" 

P15 - P16 8'-1/2" 

P16 - P17 8'-8" 

P17 - P18 7'-8 1/2" 

P18 - P19 8'-1" 

P19 - P20 8' - 2" 

P20 - P1 7'-10" 

P20 -P21 10'-4" 

P21 - P22 8' 

P22 - P23 8'-10" 

P23 - P24 8' 

P24 - P26 8' 

P26 - P8 7'-11" 

P26 - P27 Longspan

P27 - P10 7'-10" 

P27 - P28 8'-2" 

P27 - P12 10'-8" 

P28 - P29 7'-11" 

P29 - P30 8'-5" 

P30 - P31 8'-4" 

P31 - P18 10'-6" 

P31 - P32 6'-6" 

P32 - P21 6'-6" 

P2 - P21 10'-3" 

P24 – FP 4 Foundation 2'-9" 

P26 – FP 4 Foundation 9" 

P32 - Front of FP 1 Foundation 12'-5" 

P22 - Side of Front FP 1 

Foundation 5'-9" 

P9 - Back of FP 2 / 3 Foundation 11'-7" 

Back of FP 4 Foundation – Back 

of FP 2 / 3 Foundation 6'-3" 

FIGURE 9. Chimneys for stove in Room 111, 

upper left; for stove in Room 110, upper 

right; fireplace in Room 104, lower left; and 

for fireplaces in Room 101, Room 102, and 

Room 103.

FIGURE 10. Left, foundation plan for Fireplace 1, 

Room 104; right, foundation plan for Fireplace 4 

(Room 101).

9"

1'-01

2" 3'

1'-11

2 3'-6 " 1

2 1'-1 " 1

2"

5'-91

2"

2'-31

2"

4'-6"

2'-2"

111

2"

FIGURE 12. Left, brick foundation of Fireplace 1, Room 

104; right, brick foundation of Fireplace 2 (Room 

103) and 3 (Room 102).
National Park Service 37

Part I: Developmental History

and had been previously whitewashed. The two 

other chimneys on the main roof were also 

constructed of brick and historically finished with 

whitewash. In her 1996 Materials Analysis, Barbara 

Yocum identifies the brick in the chimney for 

fireplaces 1, 2 and 3 as handmade, all measuring 8 5/

8" by 4" by 2". She states that the chimney for 

fireplaces 2 and 3 is original. Although noted as a 

later addition to the house, the chimney brick in 

fireplace 4 is not described.

The chimneys on the additions are smaller in size 

than the three on the main building, constructed of 

brick and capped with small, gothic arches. These 

chimneys were not discussed in Yocum’s Materials 

Analysis. It is unknown whether these two smaller 

chimneys were for fireplaces or stove flues. There is 

a hole in the exposed roofing on the interior of 

Room 110 that aligns with the chimney. However, no 

other features associated with the two chimneys 

were evident in the interior of Rooms 110 and 111, and 

no evidence of fireplace foundations remains at 

ground level beneath the two additions.

Floor Framing

The configuration of the floor framing under the 

earliest structure reveals the original floor plan of 

the building. The sill plate consists of beams 

connected with lap and angle joints. Two or more 

beams are lap- jointed together to run the full length 

of one side of the floor framing. At the exterior 

FIGURE 14. Locations of beams/joists.
38 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

corners of the floor framing, the sill beams connect 

through an angle joint.

The floor joists beneath the original interior rooms 

run northeast to southwest, while those beneath the 

original gallery run northwest to southeast. All of 

the historic framing and some of the new framing 

members are pegged. Unused mortises in some of 

the hewn joists indicate they were recycled from 

another building at some point.

A National Park Service contractor replaced some 

of the floor framing members in the main building 

and in the additions. In particular, the floor framing 

of the southwest gallery and Room 101 has been 

replaced with circular- sawn members. Portions of 

the southeast gallery have also been replaced with 

circular- sawn members. In reconstructing part of 

the framing, the contractor used historic methods of 

joinery in most places.f 

The floor framing in the two additions varies from 

the main building. The floor framing of Room 110 

varies, including the use of circular- sawn members 

and timber poles. The floor framing of Room 111 

includes both hewn and historic, circular- sawn 

members. Overall, the joists in the two additions are 

smaller in size, indicating their later construction 

date. Also, there have been numerous modifications 

to the floor framing of the Room 110 addition. New 

joists have been added and some of the historic 

members have been supplemented. In general, the 

framing members supporting the original interior 

rooms of the main house are hewn and sash sawn. 

Those that support Room 101 are circular- sawn 

replacements. Most of the perimeter sill beams of 

the main house are circular- sawn replacements 

installed by the National Park Service contractor. 

The floor framing in Rooms 105, 106 and 107, as well 

as the southeast gallery, is hewn and sash sawn. The 

configuration, size, and characteristics of the floor 

beams and joists of all three sections of the 

Overseer’s House are identified in the tables and 

corresponding diagram on the following page.

Beams are labeled with a B and a number. The 

labeling of the floor beams does not indicate 

individual framing members but rather identifies the 

location at which the members were examined and 

measured. For simplification, the joists have been 

FIGURE 15. Above, pegged connections in 

historic floor framing; below, recycled joist in 

northwestern section of floor framing.

FIGURE 16. Left, detail of corner joint at corner of 

gallery; right, detail of lap joint in sill beams.

FIGURE 17. Log joist in floor framing of Room 110 

addition.
National Park Service 39

Part I: Developmental History

grouped into sections, or bays on the diagram. In the 

tables, they are labeled according to the diagram. 

The size of the joists is the average size for that 

section. Where there are distinct variations in joist 

sizes in an individual section, they are noted in the 

table.

Wall Framing

The wall framing throughout much of the main 

building of the Overseer’s House is inaccessible due 

to finish materials. However, based on what 

exposed original construction there is, the original 

walls of the building are framed with heavy timber 

infilled with bousillage. These walls surround 

Rooms 01, 102, 103, 104, 108 and 109 (except for the 

northwest and southwest walls of Room 101 that 

represent a later expansion of the room and are of 

frame construction). The wall constructed nd 104 is 

bousillage. The northeast wall constructed when 

Room 106 was created is also bousillage. However, 

the southeast wall of Room 106 is frame and may be 

FIGURE 18. Summary description of beams.

Beam # Cut Width Height Beam # Cut Width Height 

 

B1 Circular Sawn 8 1/2" 8 3/4" B31 Hewn 9" 9 1/2" 

B2 Circular Sawn 8 1/2" 8 3/4" B32 Hewn 9 1/2" 9 1/2" 

B3 Circular Sawn 8 1/2" 9" B33 Hewn 9 1/2" 9 1/2" 

B4 Circular Sawn 9" 9" B34 Hewn 9 1/2" 9 1/2" 

B5 Circular Sawn 9" 9" B35 Hewn 9" 9" 

B6 Circular Sawn 9" 9" B36 Hewn 9" 9" 

B7 Circular Sawn 9" 9" B37 Hewn 9" 9" 

B8 Circular Sawn 8 1/2" 8 3/4" B38 Hewn 6" 9 1/2" 

B9 Circular Sawn 8 1/2" 8 3/4" B39 Hewn 6" 10" 

B10 Circular Sawn 8 1/2" 9" B40 Hewn 6" 9 3/4" 

B11 

Circular or sash 

sewn, too 

weakened to 

identify 8 1/2" 9" B41 Hewn 6" 9 3/4" 

B12 Circular Sawn 9" 9" B42 Circular Sawn 5 1/2" 5 1/2" 

B13 Circular Sawn 8 1/2" 8 3/4" B43 Sash Sawn 6" 6" 

B14 Circular Sawn 9" 9" B44 Hewn 5" 9" 

B15 Circular Sawn 9" 9" B45 Hewn 6" 7" 

B16 Sash Sawn 9" 9" B46 Hewn 6 1/2" 6 1/2" 

B17 Sash Sawn 9" 9" B47 Hewn 6 1/2" 7" 

B18 Sash Sawn 9" 9" B48 Hewn unknown unknown 

B19 Circular Sawn 8 1/2" 8 3/4" B49 Hewn 6" 7" 

B20 Circular Sawn 6" 8 1/2" B50 Hewn 6" 7" 

B21 Hewn unknown unknown 

B22 Hewn 6" 9" 

B23 Hewn 9" 9" 

B24 Hewn 6" 9" 

B25 Hewn 6 3/4" 9" 

B26 Hewn 6" 9" 

B27 Hewn 6" 7" 

B28 Hewn 9" 9" 

B28A Hewn 9" 9 1/2" 

B29 Hewn 9" 9 1/2" 

B30 Hewn 9" 9 1/2" 
40 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

a later replacement. The northeast and southeast 

walls of Room 105 are frame construction.

The wall framing of the two later additions to the 

Overseer’s House is circular sawn, frame 

construction. In Room 110, the wall framing is 

exposed on the interior. The vertical wall framing in 

Room 110 measure 33⁄4" by 4", 4" by 4", 2" by 6" and 

4" by 6" and is spaced at approximately 34" on 

center. The beams measure 4" by 4". The wall 

framing in Room 111 is inaccessible. 

Roof Framing

The original roof configuration of the Overseer’s 

House was a hipped roof. Although not 

documented in the Design Analysis, a contractor for 

the National Park Service reconstructed the roof 

framing over the center section of the house (Rooms 

102,103 and 104). The most notable modification in 

the roof framing was the removal of any evidence of 

the earlier dormer framing on the southwest 

elevation. These dormers are documented in 

historic photos as existing as recently as the 1950s. 

The primary framing of the roof is comprised of a 6" 

by 5" circular- sawn ridge beam and four 4" by 6" 

hip rafters that rest on top of the beam. The hip 

rafters frame into the 53⁄4" by 4" top plate at the wall. 

Common and jack rafters measuring 3" by 33⁄4" and 

spaced at 36" on center span from the ridge beam 

and hip rafters to the top plate of the exterior wall of 

the structure. 

An interesting feature of the roof framing is a series 

of four braced posts that have been sawn off just

below the diagonal bracing, located beneath the 

ridge beam. The conjectural history of this framing 

installation is discussed in the Chronology of 

Development portion of this report. The truncated 

posts are planed members attached to the ridge 

beam with mortise- and- tenon joints and pegs. 

There are two variations of posts. The two 

outermost posts have only one diagonal brace, 

whereas the two inner posts each have two diagonal 

braces. The two inner posts are king posts. Running 

southeast to northwest, the vertical members of the 

posts are 3’- 8" long and measure 6" by 6’, 33⁄4" by 

33⁄4", 33⁄4" by 33⁄4", and 6’ by 6". The diagonal bracing 

of all the posts measures 23⁄4" by 33⁄4". 

FIGURE 19. Details of floor framing/joists. 

Asterik (*) indicates section where there 

was more than one joist size.

Bay Cut Width Depth 

 

A1 Circular Sawn 4" 6" 

A2 Circular Sawn 4" 6" 

B Circular Sawn 4" 6" 

C Circular Sawn 4" 6" 

D Circular Sawn 4" 6" 

E Circular Sawn 6" 7" 

F1* Hewn 5 1/2" 9" 

F2* Hewn 5" 8 1/2" 

G Sash Sawn 4" 6" 

H Sash Sawn 4" 6" 

I1 Sash Sawn 4" 6" 

I2 Sash Sawn 4" 6" 

J Sash Sawn 4" 6" 

K Sash Sawn 4" 6" 

L Sash Sawn 4" 6" 

M* Sash Sawn 4" 7" 

N* Circular Sawn 5" 6" 

O* Circular Sawn 2" 6" 

P Circular Sawn unknown unknown

Q Hewn 3" 9" 

FIGURE 20. Location of bousillage walls.

108A

109

Bousillage walls

D18

W12 W13

D1

D12

D13a D3

D4

W5

W6

D10

D14 D13b

W2 W4

D2

W3

D7 D9

W10

D6

D8 D15

W11

D11

W8 D5 W7

W9

W1

D20 D21

W15

W14

D17

D19

D16

111

101 102

108

103

104

107

106

105

110
National Park Service 41

Part I: Developmental History

Knee walls support the continuous rafters at 

approximately mid- span. The knee walls are 6’- 8" 

high and are comprised of pegged post- and- beam 

framing with diagonal bracing. The posts of the 

northeast and southwest knee walls measure 23⁄4" by 

33⁄4" and are spaced at approximately 4’- 6" on 

center. The posts of the southeast and northwest 

walls measure 23⁄4" by 33⁄4" and are spaced at 3’- 8" on 

center. The knee wall beams measure 53⁄4" by 4". The 

northeast knee wall is located 9’- 0" from the ridge 

beam. The southwest knee wall is located 9’- 6" 

from the ridge beam. 

An anomaly in the knee wall framing is that the knee 

wall that supports the northwest rafter framing, 

unlike the three other knee walls, does not bear on a 

wall below. Only the attic flooring and floor framing 

over room 102 carry the load of this knee wall. 

However, this is not a structural deficiency because, 

as discussed in the structural evaluation portion of 

this report, the knee wall transfers its bearing load to 

the floor boards, which are laid perpendicularly 

across joists that are articulated as ceiling system in 

the rooms below. The floor boards transfer the load 

to the joists, which transfer the load to the bearing 

walls on which they rest.

Gallery Roof Framing. The gallery roof is the 

exposed underside of the attic flooring. The roof 

framing is divided into three sections. The first 

section comprises the entire southwest gallery 

ceiling. The joists measure 23⁄4" by 4" and are spaced 

at 30" to 35" on center. All but four of the joists in 

this section have a small 3⁄4" bead along the bottom 

edge on both sides. The other four joists are roughsawn and were installed by contractor for the 

National Park Service.

All of the joists in this section run northeast to 

southwest. The northwestern two- thirds of the 

joists in this section frame into 5” by 8” interior and 

exterior beams. The balance of the joists in this 

section frame into a 6" by 83⁄4" girt and a 5" by 83⁄4" 

exterior beam. The 6" by 83⁄4" girt is comprised of a 

4" by 8" girt that is encased with 1" trim on the sides 

and 3⁄4" trim along the bottom. The 1" trim pieces 

have a small 3⁄4" bead along the bottom edge. The 

second section of the roof framing extends 

northeast from the southwest gallery and comprises 

approximately two- thirds of the southeast gallery

 ceiling.The joists in this section measure 23⁄4" by 4" 

and are spaced at approximately 37" to 38" on 

center. All of the joists in this section have a small 

bead along the bottom edge on both sides. The joists 

run southeast to northwest and frame into 7" by 83⁄4" 

interior and a 7" by 83⁄4" exterior beam. The 7" by 

83⁄4" beam is comprised of a 5" by 8" beam that is 

encased with 1" trim on the sides and 3⁄4" trim along 

the bottom. The 1" trim pieces have a small, 3⁄4" bead 

along the bottom edge.The third section of the roof 

framing comprises the last third of the southeast 

gallery ceiling. The joists in this section measure 3" 

FIGURE 21. Framing at hip in roof. Note 

difference in end of king post.

FIGURE 22. Southwest gallery looking southeast.
42 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

by 33⁄4" and are spaced at approximately 30" to 323⁄4" 

on center. The joists run southwest to northeast and 

are framed into a 6" by 83⁄4" girt and a 5" by 83⁄4" 

exterior top plate beam. The characteristics of the 

girt are the same as that previously discussed.

Room 110 Addition Roof Framing. Room 110 has a 

gabled roof, with the ridge oriented northeast to 

southwest. The ceiling framing is five 2" by 6" rafters 

spaced 2’- 03⁄4" apart. Exposed on the interior of the 

ceiling is the roof decking that is comprised of 11" 

whitewashed, butt- jointed boards. 

Room 111 Addition Roof Framing. Room 111 has a 

gabled roof, with the ridge oriented northeast to 

southwest. There was no access to the attic to allow 

for a documentation and assessment of the roof 

framing.

Exterior Finish 

Materials and 

Characteristics

Gallery

A gallery spans the full length of the southeast 

elevation of the main building and wraps around to 

the southwest elevation, extending to the exterior 

wall of Room 101. The gallery is 12’- 0" deep. 

Measuring from the southeast exterior wall of Room 

101 to the southeast exterior edge of the gallery, the 

gallery is 41’- 9" long. Measuring from the southwest 

exterior edge to northeast exterior edge, the 

southeast gallery is 43’- 23⁄4" long. The gallery is 

integral to the roof framing of the original building. 

The height of the gallery to the underside of the 

exterior beams is 10’- 5". 

Supporting the roof at the edge of the gallery is a 

series of square, wood columns. The columns have 

square, smooth- faced shafts with a simple capital, 

suggestive of the Tuscan order. The capital is an 

assembly of moldings. These features are 

historically significant. All of the columns have 

suffered some deterioration. As a result, the 

National Park Service has both repaired and 

replaced the historic columns, using materials to 

match the historic. All of the new material is painted 

white. The dimensions and characteristics of the 

columns are identified in the following table and 

FIGURE 23. King post in center of attic 

supporting ridge beam.

FIGURE 24. Knee walls in attic, looking 

northwest.
National Park Service 43

Part I: Developmental History

corresponding diagram. Spanning between two of 

the columns on the southwest elevation is a 

handrail, a remnant of an earlier balustrade.

Gallery Ceiling. The gallery ceiling is the exposed 

underside of the attic floor framing and flooring and 

is painted white. As discussed in the framing section 

of this report, the gallery ceiling is comprised of 

three sections. The first section spans the entire 

length of the southwest gallery. The exposed attic 

floorboards in this section measure 6" and 9" wide 

and are butt- jointed. The floorboards run 

northwest to southeast, spanning the attic floor 

joists and interior and exterior wall beams.

The second section extends northeast from the 

southwest gallery and comprises approximately 

two- thirds of the southeast gallery ceiling. The 

exposed attic floorboards in this section measure 5" 

to 9" wide and are butt- jointed. The floorboards 

run northeast to southwest and span the attic floor 

joists and girts. 

The third section comprises the last third of the 

southeast gallery ceiling. The exposed attic 

floorboards in this section measure 4" by 8" wide 

and are butt- jointed. The floorboards run 

northwest to southeast and span the attic floor joists 

and interior and exterior wall beams.

Gallery Flooring. The gallery floor is comprised of 

new, 33⁄4" by 4/4" tongue- and- groove, cypress 

boards, installed by the National Park Service. The 

flooring is unfinished.

Wall Finishes

Main Building. The exterior elevations of the main 

building in the Overseer’s House that are not 

protected by the gallery are finished with clapboard 

siding painted white. The clapboards measure 3⁄4" 

thick with a 53⁄4" exposure. According to the Design 

Analysis, this siding was installed during the stabiliFIGURE 25. Characteristics of gallery columns.

C olum n D im ensions C haracteristics 

 

1 6 3/4" by 6 3/4" T op: historic / B ottom : spliced in by N PS 

2 6 3/4" by 6 3/4" T op: historic / B ottom : spliced in by N PS 

3 6 3/4" by 6 3/4" N ew , installed by N PS 

4 6 3/4" by 6 3/4" N ew , installed by N PS 

5 6 3/4" by 6 3/4" N ew , installed by N PS 

6 6 3/4" by 6 3/4" T op: historic / B ottom : spliced in by N PS 

7 6 1/2" by 6 1/2" T op: historic / B ottom : spliced in by N PS 

8 6 3/4" by 6 3/4" T op: historic / B ottom : spliced in by N PS 

9 6 3/4" by 6 3/4" T op: historic / B ottom : spliced in by N PS 

10 6 3/4" by 6 3/4" T op: historic / B ottom : spliced in by N PS 

11 6 1/2" by 6 3/4" T op: historic / B ottom : spliced in by N PS 

FIGURE 26. Southwest elevation.

FIGURE 27. Typical column capital.
44 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

zation measures that were completed in 1998 and 

matches the clapboard siding that historically 

finished the exterior walls. This information 

conflicts with the developmental history of the 

exterior presented in Barbara Yocum’s Materials 

Analysis. A discussion of this discrepancy may be 

found in the Chronology of Development portion of 

this report. 

According to information provided in the 1986 

HABS drawings, a window and door existed on the 

northwest elevation between Windows 2 and 4, on 

the northwest wall of Room 102. The existing 

clapboard siding obscures these features from view 

on the exterior. Likewise, the clapboard siding 

covers Door 3 on the northeast exterior wall of 

Room 106. This door exists and is accessible from 

the interior of the building. The southeast and 

southwest exterior walls of the original building that 

are protected by the gallery roof have different 

finishes than the balance of the exterior. There is a 

3" wide, beaded chair rail on these walls located 2’- 

93⁄4" above the finished floor. Likewise, there is a 7" 

wide, beaded baseboard along these walls. The 

southeast wall of Room 101 is frame construction 

and is finished with horizontally- installed flush 

board siding that is painted white. The boards 

measure 11" wide.

The southwest exterior walls of Rooms 103 and 104 

and the southeast exterior wall of Room 104 are of 

bousillage construction and are finished with plaster 

and white paint. The southeast exterior wall of 

Room 105 is frame construction and is finished with 

horizontally- installed flush board siding that is 

painted white. Most of the boards in this wall 

measure 5" in width. One board located below the 

chair rail measures 11" wide. 

Wing Additions. Some of the exterior walls of the 

two wing additions to the main building are covered 

with a granulated, asphalt siding. This siding is 

applied in 15" strips and is brown, with a brick 

pattern. Each strip bears the pattern of five and 

one- half courses of brick and has wire- cut 

detailing. The strips are installed to reveal a 14" 

exposure. 

Room 110 Addition. Room 110 is an addition to the 

north end of the northeast exterior elevation of the 

main house and connects to Room 108 through 

FIGURE 28. Southwest elevation.

FIGURE 29. Southwest exterior walls at Rooms 

104 and 105.

FIGURE 30. Southwest exterior walls at Rooms 103 

and 104.
National Park Service 45

Part I: Developmental History

Door 18. The northwest, northeast, and southeast 

exterior walls of Room 110 are finished with brown, 

granulated, asphalt siding with a brick pattern. Black 

felt paper has been installed along the southeast end 

of the northwest elevation to protect a damaged area 

of the underlying siding. There are 53⁄4" by 3⁄4" corner 

boards installed at the left corner of the northwest 

elevation, at the right and left corners of the 

northeast elevation, and at the right corner of the 

southeast elevation. There is a 63⁄4" by 3⁄4" corner 

board installed at the left corner of the southeast 

elevation. This corner board appears new and was 

likely installed by the National Park Service. The 

southwest interior wall of Room 110 is the northeast 

exterior wall of Room 109 and a portion of Room 

108.

Room 111 Addition. Room 111 is a freestanding 

section of the Overseer’s House, located just 

southeast of Room 110 along the northeast elevation 

of the main building. The northwest and northeast 

exterior walls of this addition are finished with 

brown, granulated, asphalt siding with a brick 

pattern. Black felt paper has been installed over two 

areas on the upper portion of the northwest wall 

and along the right and bottom edges of the 

northeast wall. There is a 2" by 3" downspout 

located along the left edge of the northwest wall. 

The southeast exterior wall is finished with 3⁄4" thick 

clapboard siding with a 53⁄4" exposure. The 

clapboards are finished with weathered whitewash. 

There is a 5" by 3⁄4" corner board installed at the right 

corner and a 23⁄4" by 3⁄4" corner board installed at the 

left corner of the southeast elevation. The gabled 

end of the southwest exterior wall is finished with 

sixteen 3⁄4" thick clapboard siding boards with a 53⁄4" 

exposure. The balance of the southwest exterior 

wall is finished with brown, granulated, asphalt 

siding with a brick pattern.

Roofing

The main portion of the Overseer’s House has new, 

5V- galvanized roofing applied over new 2" by 33⁄4" 

circular sawn, roofing lath spaced at 22" on center. 

The roofing on the two later additions to the 

Overseer’s House is weathered, 23⁄4" corrugated 

metal. The roofing lath of the roof of the Room 111 

addition measures variably from 5" to 10" wide, is 4/

4" thick,1

 and is spaced at 3" to 5". There are 4" 

ogee- shaped gutters installed at the northwest and

1. The use of fractions in lumber dimensions denotes 

true measurements. For example, 4/4" indicates for 

quarters of an inch, or a 1" lumber dimension.

FIGURE 31. Room 111 wing, southeast elevation.

FIGURE 32. Room 110 wing, northwest elevation.

FIGURE 33. Room 110, northeast end.
46 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

southeast eaves of the Room 110 roof. There is a 6” 

gutter at northwest eave of the Room 111 roof.

Doors

Twenty of the twenty- one doors in the Overseer’s 

House are currently accessible. Door opening 2, 

located on the northwest elevation of the main 

house is covered by clapboard siding on the exterior 

and gypsum board on the interior. The historic door 

types in the building include board- and- batten, 

recessed panel with single and multi- lights, and 

screened. Some of the doors have multi- light 

transoms. The National Park Service has installed 

temporary plywood doors fitted with metal louvers 

in openings where the historic doors have either 

been removed or are missing. The door 

characteristics are discussed on the following pages. 

For simplification, some of these characteristics 

have been included in table format in Figure 54.

Door 1: There are two doors in this opening: an 

exterior screen door and an interior recessed panel 

door. The exterior door measures 2’- 53⁄4" by 6’- 11" 

and is comprised of two panels of screen wire 

framed between stiles and rails. The stiles both 

measure 31⁄4" wide and the rails measure 33⁄4", 33⁄4’ and 

5", top to bottom. The butt hinges measure 1" by 3". 

The interior door in this opening is of stile- and- rail 

construction, with multiple lights over recessed 

panels. On the exterior, the stiles measure 3" and 

23⁄4", left to right, with a 33⁄4" stile dividing the two 

recessed panels in the lower section of the door. 

From the top of the door down, the rails measure 

23⁄4’, 83⁄4" and 73⁄4". The upper portion is comprised of 

six divided lights. The lights each measure 8" by 1’-

2". The lower section of the door is comprised of 

two recessed panels. The panels each measure 

approximately 93⁄4" wide with a 1" bevel on all four 

sides. Above the door is a three- light transom with 

two strap hinges on the top and a dog stop on each 

side. Each light measures 8" by 1’- 4", and each dog 

stop measures 1" by 23⁄4".

Door 2: Based on information provided in the 1986 

HABS drawings and photographs provided in Ali 

Miri’s 1996 Historic Structure Assessment report 

completed for the Overseer’s House, this door was 

of board- and- batten construction. The 

photographs also show that a screen door once 

existed at this location. The drawings document a 

shed roof supported by knee braces over the door. 

Due to the recent application of interior and 

exterior finishes, this door is currently inaccessible, 

and all the historic features surrounding the door, if 

still existing, are concealed from view.

Door 3: Door 3 is board- and- batten construction 

comprised of six boards connected to three battens. 

The boards measure 43⁄4", 5", 5", 5", 5", and 33⁄4". The 

battens all measure 4" by 1". The butt hinges 

measure 13⁄4" by 33⁄4". 

Door 4: The historic door and transom lights for this 

opening have been removed. The National Park 

Service has installed a plywood door fitted with 

metal louvers in this door opening. Likewise, 

plywood has been installed in the transom opening.

The 1986 HABS drawings indicate a door 

constructed of stiles and rails and with six divided 

lights once hung in the opening. The drawings also 

indicate that a four- light transom existed over the 

door. It is unknown whether this door and transom 

currently exist and have been stored elsewhere.

Door 5: There are two doors in this opening. The 

exterior board- and- batten door is comprised of 

seven boards connected to three beveled battens. 

The boards each measure 5" wide. The battens all 

measure 93⁄4" by 4/4" and have a 3⁄4" bevel. The strap 

hinges are wrought iron and measure 1’- 5" and 1’- 3" 

wide. 

FIGURE 34. Corrugated roofing on additions 

(Rooms 110 and 111).
National Park Service 47

Part I: Developmental History

The interior screen door is constructed of stiles and 

rails and decorative millwork framing wire 

screening. The stiles measure 23⁄4" wide and the rails 

measure 23⁄4", 23⁄4", 23⁄4", 23⁄4" and 5", top to bottom. 

Above the door is a four- light transom. The light 

furthest to the left, when looking at the transom 

from the exterior, is missing. A piece of plywood has 

been installed in this opening.

Door 6: There are two doors in this opening. The 

exterior board- and- batten door is comprised of six 

tongue- and- groove boards, five of which are 

beaded and measure approximately 6" wide. 

Beading is located at the center and on the tongue 

edge of each board. The sixth board is not typical of 

the other boards in the door and appears to be a 

replacement. The boards are connected to three 

beveled battens. The battens measure 6" by 4/4" and 

have a 1" bevel. The strap hinges are wrought iron 

and measure 1’- 5" by 2". The interior screen door is 

constructed of stiles and rails and decorative 

millwork framing wire screening. The stiles 

measures 23⁄4" and the rails measure 3", 23⁄4", 3" and 

6", top to bottom.

Door 7: This door is board- and- batten 

construction comprised of five boards connected to 

three beveled battens. Beading runs down the 

center of each board, bisecting it into two 33⁄4" by 4/

4" segments, and along the edges of the boards. The 

battens all measure 6" by 2’- 113⁄4" by 4/4" and have a 

1" bevel. The strap hinges are wrought iron and 

measure 1’- 2" by 13⁄4". 

Door 8: Door 8 is board- and- batten construction 

and measures 3’- 03⁄4" by 7’- 103⁄4". There are seven 

beaded boards connected to three beveled battens. 

The boards measure 5" by 3⁄4". The battens measure 

7/8" by 1" and have a 1" bevel on the top and bottom 

edge. The right and left edges of the battens are not 

beveled. The rim lock measures 31⁄4" by 4" by 3⁄4". 

The door has a glass doorknob.

FIGURE 35. Location of windows and doors.

108A

109

* No longer extant

D18

W12 W13

D1

D12

D13a D3

D4

W5

W6

D10

D14 D13b

W2 W4

D2

W3

D7 D9

W10

D6

D8

D15

W11

D11

W8 D5 W7

W9

W1

D20 D21

W15

W14

D17

D19

D16

111

101 102

108

103

104

107

106

105

110
48 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

Door 9: Door 9 is board- and- batten construction 

and measures 3’- 03⁄4" by 7’- 10". There are six boards 

connected to three beveled battens. Beading runs 

down the center of each board, bisecting it into two 

3" by 3⁄4" segments, and along the edges of the 

boards. The battens measure 6" by 4/4" and have a 

1" bevel on all four sides. The strap hinges are 

wrought iron and measure 1’- 03⁄4" by 23⁄4".

Door 10:Five boards of the same dimension, 33⁄4" by 

4/4", with one additional board at 53⁄4" by 4/4", 

constitute the door. There is a " bead in the center 

and a " bead on the tongue edge of the boards of 

common dimension. The odd- dimensioned board 

does not have the bead feature. The boards are 

connected to three beveled battens. The battens 

measure 6" by 4/4" and have a 1" bevel on all four 

sides. The strap hinges are wrought iron and 

measure 12" by 13⁄4".

Door 11:Door 11 is of stile- and- rail construction. 

Plywood has been installed in the upper and lower 

sections of the door, between the stiles and rails. 

Given the configuration of other stile- and- rail 

doors in the building that do not have screening, it is 

clear from the muntin mortises that the upper 

section of Door 11 was once comprised of four over 

four divided lights while the lower section consisted 

of wood panel(s). On the exterior, the stiles measure 

3" and 23⁄4", left to right, with a 33⁄4" stile dividing the 

two recessed panels in the lower section of the door. 

FIGURE 36. Summary of door characteristics.

 Opening Hardware 

Door 

# Width Height Door Type Hinge Type Latch Type 

 

1 2'-6" 6'-11" Screened (Exterior) Butt None 

 Stile and Rail w/Glass Lights (Interior) Rim Lock 

2 NA NA NA NA NA 

3 2'-6 1/4" 6'-9 1/2" Board and Batten Butt Rim Lock 

4 1'-10 1/2" 5'-11 3/4" Plywood / NPS Butt Unknown 

5 3'-1" 7'-10 3/4" inside Board and Batten (Exterior) Strap None 

 Screened (Interior) Butt Hook and Eye 

6 3’-1” 7'-10 3/4" outside Board and Batten (Exterior) Strap Rim Lock 

 Screened (Interior) Unknown Hook and Eye 

7 3'-1" 7'-10 3/4" Board and Batten Strap Rim Lock 

8 3'-1" 7'-10 3/4" Board and Batten Strap Rim Lock 

9 3'-1" 7'-10 3/4" Board and Batten Strap Hook and Eye 

10 2’-11 1⁄2” 7'-4" Board and Batten Strap None 

11 3'-1" 7'-2 1/2" Stile and Rail w/Plywood Butt Unknown 

12 2'-8 1/2" 6'-9" Stile and Rail w/Glass Light Butt None 

13a 2'-11" 6'-11" Board and Batten Butt 

Rim Lock, Hook & 

Eye 

13b Unknown Unknown Board and Batten Strap None 

14 2'-3 1/2" 6'-2" Board and Batten Butt Slide Bolt 

15 2'-4" 5'-10 1/2" Board and Batten Strap None 

16 2'-6 1/2" 6'-7 1/2" Stile and Rail* Butt None 

17 2'-8" 6'-8" Stile and Rail Unknown Unknown 

18 2'-7" 7' Board and Batten Strap Hook and Eye 

19 2'-10 1/2" 7' Board and Batten Strap Hasp and Staple 

20 3' 6'-7 1/4" Plywood / NPS Unknown Unknown 

21 3' 6'-8" Board and Batten Strap Shutter Dog 
National Park Service 49

Part I: Developmental History

From the top of the door down, the rails measure 4" by 1", 73⁄4" by 1" and 5" by 1". 

FIGURE 37. Photographs of doors.

Door 3, Interior Door 4, Temporary

Exterior

Door 1, Exterior Door 1, Exterior 

Screen Door

Door 3, Exterior

Door 5, Interior Door 5, Interior 

Screen Door 

Door 6, Exterior

Door 6, Interior 

Door 4, Temporary 

Interior Door 5, Exterior

Door 6, Screened Door 8, Room 102 Door 8, Room 103

Interior

Door 7, Room 102
50 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description
National Park Service 51

Part I: Developmental History

D o o r 1 6 , T o p D o o r 1 7 , R o o m

D o o r 1 8 , R o o m 

108

D o o r 1 8 , R o o m 1 1 0 D o o r 1 9 , E x te rio r

D o o r 1 9 , In te rio r 

T e m p o ra ry 

D o o r 2 0 

H is to ric D o o r 2 0 D o o r 2 1 , 

I n te r io r 

D o o r 2 1 ,

 E x te rio r

FIGURE 38. Details of typical hardware.
Physical Description 

Door 1 Door 1 Screen 

Door 3 

Door 2

unavailable at time

of site visit 

Door 5 

Door 5 Screen 

Door 4 

temporary at time 

of site visit 

Door 6 

Door 6 Screen 

Door 7 

52 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR 
Part I: Developmental History 

Door 8 Door 9 

Door 11 

Door 12 

Door 13 

Door 14 Door 15 Door 16 Door 17 

Door 10 

National Park Service 53 
Physical Description 

Door 18 Door 19 Door 20 

Door 21 

Door 1 

Door 3 

Door 4 

Door 5 Door 6 Door 7 Door 8 

Door 9

54 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR 
Part I: Developmental History 

Door 15 

Door16 

Door 10 

Door 13 

Door 12 

Door11 

Door 19 

Door 20 Door 21 

Door 17 Door 18 

National Park Service 55 
Physical Description 

Head 

Door 1 

Jamb 

Door 1 

Threshold 

Door 1 

Hardware 

Door 1 

Head 

Door 3 

Jamb 

Door 3 

Threshold 

Door 3 

Head 

Door 5 

Jamb 

Door 5 

Threshold 

Door 5 

Hardware 

Door 5 

56 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR 
Part I: Developmental History 

Head 

Door 6 

Jamb 

Door 6 

Threshold 

Door 6 Hardware 

Door 6 

Head 

Door 7 Jamb 

Door 7 

Head 

Door 8 

Jamb 

Door 8 

Head 

Door 9 

Jamb 

Door 9 

Head 

Door 10 

Jamb 

Door 10 

National Park Service 57 
Physical Description 

Head 

Door 11 

Head 

Door 12 

Jamb 

Door 12 

Threshold 

Door 12 

Jamb 

Door 11 

Threshold 

Door 11 

Head 

Door 13 

Jamb 

Door 13 

Head 

Door 14 

Jamb 

Door 14 

Threshold 

Door 13 

Head 

Door 15 

Jamb 

Door 15 

58 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR 
Part I: Developmental History 

Head 

Door 17 

Jamb 

Door 17 

Threshold 

Door 17 

Head 

Door 18 Jamb 

Door 18 Threshold 

Door 18 

Jamb 

Door 19 

Threshold 

Door 19 

Head 

Door 19 

Head 

Door 21 

Jamb 

Door 21 

Head 

Door 20 

Jamb 

Door 20 

National Park Service 59 
60 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

Door 12: Door 12 measures 2’- 73⁄4" by 6’- 83⁄4". The 

door is of stile- and- rail construction, comprised of 

one large light over three recessed panels. The stiles 

measure 4" and 4", and the rails measure 53⁄4", 43⁄4", 

3", 3", and 9" from the top of the door down. The 

single pane of glass measures 1’- 11" by 2’- 93⁄4". The 

lower section of the door is comprised of three 

recessed panels. The panels each measure 1’- 11" by 

73⁄4".

Door 13a: Door 13a is of board- and- batten 

construction and is comprised of six boards 

connected to two beveled battens. Five of the six 

boards are beaded and measure 5" by 4/4". The 

sixth door measures 9" wide and is not beaded. 

From the top of the door down, the battens measure 

93⁄4" by 3⁄4" and 93⁄4" by 1". Both battens have a 1" bevel 

on all four sides. The strap hinges measure 1’- 1" by 

13⁄4". The rim lock measures 4" by 3" by 3⁄4". The door 

has a metal doorknob. 

Door 13b: Door 13b is of board- and- batten 

construction and is comprised of five beaded boards 

connected to three beaded battens.

Door 14: Door 14 is of board- and- batten 

construction and is comprised of four boards 

connected to three battens. Measuring left to right 

on the exterior side of the door, the four boards 

measure 2" by 4/4", 7", 6", and 11". The battens each 

measure 5" by 5/4". The butt hinges measure 4" by 

13⁄4".

Door 15: Door 15 is of board- and- batten 

construction and is comprised of four boards 

connected to three battens. Measuring left to right 

on the exterior side of the door, the four boards 

measure 53⁄4", 7", 4", and 73⁄4". The battens measure 

63⁄4" by 4/4", 73⁄4" by 4/4" and 63⁄4’ by 4/4", from the 

top of the door down. The top batten has a 1" bevel 

on all four sides, while the lower two battens have a 

3⁄4" bevel on all four sides. The strap hinges measure 

11" by 13⁄4". 

Door 16: Door 16 provides access to Room 108A, a 

closet. Above Door 16 is a cabinet door providing 

access to a storage area above the door. The primary 

door measures 2’- 6" by 6’- 7". The door is of stileand- rail construction. The stiles measure 33⁄4" and 

33⁄4". From the top of the door down, the rails 

measure 33⁄4", 33⁄4’ and 3", The panels each measure 

1’- 11" by 73⁄4". The interior of the door is covered 

with gypsum wallboard. 

Door 17: Door 17 is of stile- and- rail construction 

and measures 2’- 8" by 6’- 73⁄4". The stiles measure 4" 

and 4". From the top of the door down, the rails 

measure 4", 63⁄4" and 9". 

Door 18: Door 18 is of board- and- batten 

construction and measures 2’- 63⁄4" by 6’- 11". The 

door is comprised of three boards connected to 

three beveled battens. The boards measure 11", 11" 

and 83⁄4". The battens measure 53⁄4" by 2’- 43⁄4" by 4/

4" and have a 3⁄4" bevel. The strap hinges measure 1’-

3" by 1".

Door 19: Door 19 is of board- and- batten 

construction and measures 2’- 10" by 6’- 11". The 

door is comprised of four boards connected to three 

battens. The boards measure 53⁄4", 53⁄4", 113⁄4" and 113⁄4". 

The battens measure 53⁄4" by 2’- 83⁄4" by 4/4". The 

strap hinges measure 11’- 1" by 13⁄4". The hasp and 

staple lock were installed by the National Park 

Service. 

Door 20: Door 20 has been removed from its frame 

and is currently stored inside Room 111. A temporary, 

plywood, stabilization door has been installed in the 

opening. The historic door is of board- and- batten 

construction and measures 3’- 03⁄4" by 6’- 9". The 

door is comprised of seven boards connected to 

three beaded battens. The boards measure 5", 5", 

53⁄4", 53⁄4", 53⁄4", 53⁄4’, and 5". The battens measure 53⁄4" 

by 2’- 11" by 4/4" and have a bead along the top and 

bottom edges. The strap hinges measure 3" by 8".

Door 21: Door 21 is of board- and- batten 

construction and measures 3’- 03⁄4"by 6’- 10". The 

door is comprised of seven tongue- and- groove 

boards connected to three beaded battens. The 

boards measure 4", 5", 53⁄4", 5", 5", 5", and 5". The 

battens measure 53⁄4" by 2’- 113⁄4" by 3⁄4" and have a 

bead along the top and bottom edges. The strap 

hinges measure 1’- 2" by 3". 

Screened Doors: Located in Room 104, is a set of 

two screened doors. The size of these doors exceeds 

that of the exterior door opening in this room, Door 

5. According to the National Park Service, these 
National Park Service 61

Part I: Developmental History

doors belong to the Store at Magnolia and are being 

stored temporarily in the Overseer’s House.

Windows

Fourteen of the fifteen windows in the Overseer’s 

House are currently accessible. Window opening 3, 

located on the northwest elevation of the main 

house, is covered by vinyl siding on the exterior and 

gypsum board on the interior. Based on existing 

conditions and information provided in the 1986 

HABS drawings and the Materials Analysis

completed for the Overseer’s House by Barbara 

Yocum in August, 1996, all of the windows held 

double hung sashes at one time.2

 There are six over 

x and four over four divided light sashes in the 

building. The National Park Service has stabilized 

all of the accessible, exterior windows. These 

 windows have either been either fitted with a metal 

louver in the lower section or entirely covered on 

the exterior by plywood fitted with a metal louver. 

Where existing, the sashes have been pushed 

upward and transoms are located over some of the 

windows. Likewise, exterior shutters are mounted 

adjacent to some of the window openings. The 

locations of the windows are detailed on the floor 

plan below. The window characteristics are 

discussed on the following pages. For simplification, 

some of these characteristics have been included in 

table format. 

Window 1: A transom with three lights of equal size 

is located above this window.

Window 2: See Table.

Window 3. This window is covered by interior and 

exterior wall finishes and is inaccessible. 

Photographs provided in Ali Miri’s 1996 report 

indicate that this window was expressed on the 

2. Yocum, p. 44. exterior of the building at that time, but it has since

FIGURE 41. Window characteristics.

Window 

Opening 

Width 

Opening 

Height 

# of Existing

Sashes in 

Opening 

# of Lights 

in Sashes 

Location and Type of Stabilization 

Panels 

 

W1 2'-6" 4'-10 1/2" 2 0 / 6 Lower, wood louver 

W2 2'-6" 4'-11" 2 1 / 1 Upper & Lower, plywood w/metal louver

W3 NA NA NA NA NA 

W4 2'-0 3/4" 4'-5" 2 4 

Upper & Lower, plywood w/ metal 

louver 

W5 2'-10 1/2" 4'-5 1/2" 2 6 

Upper & Lower, plywood w/ metal 

louver 

W6 2'-11" 4'-5" 2 6 Upper & Lower, plywood w/metal louver

W7 2'-6 3/4" 5' 2 6 Lower, wood louver 

W8 2'-6 3/4" 5' 2 6 Lower, wood louver 

W9 2'-6 3/4" 5' 2 6 Lower, wood louver 

W10 2'-7" 4'-11 1/2" 2 6 Lower, wood louver 

W11 2'-6 1/2" 5' 0 0 None 

W12 2' 5'-1 1/2" 1 4 

Upper & Lower, plywood w/ metal 

louver 

W13 2'-0 3/4" 5'-2" 1 4 

Upper & Lower, plywood w/ metal 

louver 

W14 2'-1" 4'-4 1/4" 0 4 

Upper & Lower, plywood w/ metal 

louver 

W15 2'-4" 5'-0 1/2" 0 6* 

Upper & Lower, plywood w/metal 

louver, wood louver 
62 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

FIGURE 42. Photographs of windows.

W in d o w 1 , 

E x te rio r W in d o w 1 , 

In te rio r

W in d o w 2 , E x te rio r

W in d o w 2 , 

In te rio r

W indow 3 – 

U navailable 

at tim e of site 

visit

W in d o w 4 , 

E x te rio r W in d o w 5 , E x te rio r

W in d o w 5 , In te rio r

W in d o w 6 , E x te rio r 

W in d o w 6 , In te rio r W in d o w 7 , E x te rio r

W indow 8, Exterior

W in d o w 8 , In te rio r

W in d o w 9 , E x te rio r W indow 9, Exterior
National Park Service 63

Part I: Developmental History

W indow 10, Exterior

W in d o w 1 0 , In te rio r W in d o w 1 1 , R o o m 

103

Evidence of original bars

Window 11, Room 103

W in d o w 1 2 , E x te rio r

W in d o w 1 2 , 

I n te r io r

W in d o w 1 3 , 

E x te rio r

W in d o w 1 3 , 

I n te r io r

W in d o w 1 4 , E x te rio r

W in d o w 1 5 , E x te rio r

W in d o w 1 5 , In te rio r

Sashes stored in R oom 111, 

possibly from W indow 15
Physical Description 

Sill

Window 5 Jamb

Window 5

Sill

Window 2

Head

Window 1

Jamb

Window 1

Jamb

Window 4 Sill

Window 4

Head 

Window 4 

Head 

Window 2 

Head

Window 2

Head 

Window 5 

64 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR 
Part I: Developmental History 

Head 

Window 6 Jamb

Window 6

Sill

Window 6

Jamb

Window 7

Head

Window 7

Head

Window 9

Head

Window 8

Jamb

Window 8

Jamb

Window 9

National Park Service 65 
Physical Description 

Sill

Window 10

Head 

Window 10 

Jamb

Window 10

Sill

Window 11

Jamb

Window 11

Head 

Window 11 

Sill

Window 12

Head 

Window 12 

Jamb

Window 12

66 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR 
Part I: Developmental History 

Jamb

Window 13

Sill

Window 13

Head 

Window 13 

Head 

Window 14 

Head

Window 15 Jamb 

Window 15 

Jamb

Window 14

Sill

Window 14

Exterior

elevation of

shutter

Interior 

elevation of 

shutter 

National Park Service 67 
68 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

been covered by clapboard during the treatments 

instituted by the National Park Service

Window 4: See Table. Ali Miri notes in his 1997 

report that this window appears to have been a later 

conversion from an earlier, larger window. A size 

comparison of this window to the other windows 

known to be original to the building indicates that it 

is, in fact, narrower, though its height is comparable. 

Window 5: See Table.

Window 6: See Table.

Window 7: See Table.

Window 8: A board- and- batten shutter is 

mounted to the left side of the exterior trim 

surrounding this opening. The shutter measures 2’-

63⁄4" by 5’- 0" and is comprised of five 6" by 1" 

beaded boards nailed to two 5" by 1" beveled 

battens. The boards each have a 3⁄4" bead running 

down the center, bisecting them into two 23⁄4" 

sections. The battens have a 1" bevel on all four, 

exposed sides. A wooden shutter dog is mounted on 

the chair rail beneath the shutter. See detail below.

Window 9: A board- and- batten shutter is 

mounted to the right side of the exterior trim 

surrounding this opening. The shutter is comprised 

of four 3/8" by 5’- 0" by 7/8" beaded boards nailed 

to two 7/8" by 2’- 0" by 1" beveled battens. The 

boards each have a " bead running down the center, 

bisecting them into two 33⁄4" sections. The battens 

have a 1" bevel on the two long edges. A wooden 

shutter dog is mounted on the chair rail beneath the 

shutter.

Window 10: A board- and- batten shutter is 

mounted to the right side of the exterior trim 

surrounding this opening. The shutter is comprised 

of five 6" by 5’- 0" by 3⁄4" beaded boards nailed to 

two 5" by 2’- 33⁄4" by 1" beveled battens. The boards 

each have a bead running down the center, bisecting 

them into two 3" sections. The battens have a 1" 

bevel on the two long edges. A wooden shutter dog 

is mounted on the chair rail beneath the shutter.

Window 11: This window is located on the interior 

wall separating Rooms 103 and 106 and holds no 

sashes. The underside of the head at this window 

opening reveals seven square mortises turned at 45 

degrees to resemble diamond shapes. The Materials 

Analysis asserts that these mortises once held square 

bars that extended the length of the window. To the 

right of the opening, mounted on window trim in 

FIGURE 43. Fireplace #4 in Room 101. FIGURE 44. Room 101, northwest wall.
National Park Service 69

Part I: Developmental History

Room 106, are two hinge pins. The characteristics of 

this hardware indicate that a casement type shutter 

was once likely mounted at this window opening. 

Window 12: See Table.

Window 13: See Table.

Window 14: See Table.

Window 15: There are no sashes in this window. 

However, the 1986 HABS drawings depict double 

hung sashes in this opening, each with six divided 

lights. There are two sashes, each with six lights, 

currently stored inside Room 111.

Interior Finish 

Materials and 

Characteristics

Room 101

Ceiling. The height of the ceiling in Room 101 is 10’ 

to 10" above the finished floor. The ceiling is 

comprised of the exposed underside of the attic 

floor framing and flooring. The attic flooring 

exposed in this room runs northwest to southeast 

and varies in width. See Attic Flooring Table included 

later in this report for detailed dimensions. The 

boards span joists approximately 36" on center. The 

ceiling is painted white.

Flooring. The flooring is 5” tongue- and- groove 

pine boards running northwest to southeast. The 

floorboards are unfinished.

Walls. The northwest and northeast walls are of 

bousillage construction and are finished with 

gypsum wallboard and paint. There is a 3" by 3⁄4" 

thick chair rail located on these walls, 2’- 93⁄4" above 

the finished floor. Along the base of the walls are 

baseboards measuring 6" by 4/4" thick and finished 

with 3⁄4" quarter- round molding. 

The original portion of the southwest wall, spanning 

from the northwest wall to a point that is in near 

alignment with the southeast end of the fireplace 

across the room, is of bousillage construction. The 

balance of the southwest wall and the entire 

southeast walls were constructed when Room 101 

was expanded and are comprised of horizontallyaligned, circular- sawn, butt- jointed boards. The 

FIGURE 45. Room 101 ceiling and southwest 

wall.

FIGURE 46. Elevations and plan of 

mantel at fireplace in Room 101.

2'-4"

4'-41

2"

4'-41

4"

3'-23

4"

1'-63

4"

4'-41

4"

111

4"

2'-31

2" 2'-63

4"

1'-63

4"

2'-4"

4'

4'-41

2"

21

4"2

2"
70 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

entire wall is finished with gypsum wallboard and 

paint.

Fireplace. Located on the northeast wall to the 

right of Door 7 is an enclosed brick fireplace that is 

finished with plaster, wood, and paint. Overall, the 

fireplace is 52" wide and 303⁄4" deep from the 

exterior face of the mantelpiece to the back of the 

chimney breast. The top of the mantelpiece is 503⁄4" 

above the finished floor. The firebox measures 37" 

wide by 33” tall. Separating the mantelpiece and the 

firebox is a header that measures 163⁄4" tall. Flanking 

the firebox is pilaster- like detailing. The chimney 

measures 28" wide and 183⁄4" deep.

Electrical and Heating Fixtures. The only light 

fixture in this room is a ceiling fan with a pendant, 

light- bulb socket. This light fixture was installed 

sometime after 1937 but appears to date to within the 

period of significance. Other fixtures in the room 

include an abandoned junction box and an electrical 

cover plate in the baseboard in the southwest wall of 

the room. Located approximately 14" to the left of 

the fireplace and 4" from the wall is a 1" hole in the 

floor, which presumably once held the gas supply. A 

1” hole in the floor, 14” to the northwest of the 

fireplace and 4" from the northeast wall is the 

location of a previous gas pipe and valve, likely used 

for gas space heaters in the middle of the twentieth

century. A gas valve is located on the floor near the 

hole.

Room 102

Ceiling. The height of the ceiling in Room 102 is 

10’- 9 " above the finished floor The ceiling is 

comprised of the exposed underside of the attic 

floor framing and flooring. The attic flooring 

exposed in this room runs northwest to southeast 

and measures from 43⁄4" to 93⁄4" wide. The boards 

span 43⁄4" by 3" joists that run northeast to southwest 

and are spaced at approximately 24" on center. The 

ceiling is painted white.

Flooring. The flooring is 53⁄4" tongue- and- groove 

pine boards running northeast to southwest. The 

floorboards are unfinished.

Walls. The southwest, southeast, and northeast 

walls in Room 102 are of bousillage construction and 

are finished with gypsum wallboard and paint Along 

FIGURE 47. Fireplace #3 in Room 102. the base of these walls are baseboards measuring 

FIGURE 48. Room 102, looking north.
National Park Service 71

Part I: Developmental History

53⁄4" by 4/4" thick and finished with 3⁄4" quarterround molding. The National Park Service has 

installed expanded polystyrene board over the 

northwest wall as a temporary insulation measure. 

Room 102 is temporarily being used as a glazing 

room for the repair of window sashes from the 

Magnolia Store. Beneath the polystyrene board is 

new, heavy timber framing installed by the National 

Park Service contractor. According to National Park 

Service officials, the historic bousillage from this wall 

is currently stored in bins located in the Carriage 

Shed.

Fireplace. Located on the southeast wall, to the left 

of Door 8 is an enclosed brick fireplace that is 

finished with gypsum wallboard, wood, and paint. 

Overall, the fireplace is 66” wide and 283⁄4" deep 

from the exterior face of the mantelpiece to the back 

of the chimney breast. The dimensions of the 

firebox could not be determined because it was the 

National Park Service. The chimney breast is 

comprised of a series of decorative moldings. The 

chimney is covered in gypsum wallboard. It 

measures 4’- 9 3/4" wide and 93⁄4" deep. There is a 

633⁄4" long by 17" wide hearth at the base of the 

fireplace. See illustration for more details.

Electrical Fixtures. The light fixtures in this room 

include a ceiling fan with four, single light- bulb

sockets and a hooded, globe- covered light 

suspended from a ceiling joist. According to historic 

documentation, electricity was brought to the Cane 

River area about 1938. Both lighting fixtures in this 

room appear to date to within the period of 

significance. An electrical outlet cover plate is 

located in the baseboard of the southwest wall of the 

room, to the right of Door 7.

Room 103

Ceiling. The height of the ceiling in Room 103 is 

10’- 93⁄4"above the finished floor. The ceiling is 

comprised of the exposed underside of the attic 

door framing and flooring. The attic flooring 

exposed in this room runs northwest to southeast 

and varies in width. See Attic Flooring Table included

later in this report for detailed dimensions. The 

boards span 31⁄4" by 43⁄4" joists that run northeast to 

southwest and re spaced at approximately 33" on 

center. There is a 3⁄4" bead on both sides of the joists, 

along the bottom edge. The ceiling is painted white.

FIGURE 49. Light fixture in Room 102.

FIGURE 50. Elevation, plan, and trim details of 

mantel at Fireplace #3, Room 102.

3'-71

2"

5'-61

4"

2'-33

4"

5'-61

4"

2'-51

2" 2'-43

4"

1'-71

2" 1'-63

4"

1"

1"

23

4"2

1

2"

3

4"

11

4"1
72 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

Flooring. The flooring is 31⁄4", tongue- and- groove 

pine boards running northeast to southwest. The 

floorboards are unfinished.

Walls. The walls in Room 103 are of bousillage 

construction and are finished with gypsum 

wallboard and paint. Along the base of these walls 

are baseboards measuring 7" by 4/4" thick and 

finished with 3⁄4" quarter round boards. There is a 

small wooden doorstop mounted on the baseboard 

to the immediate right of Door 6. 

Fireplace. Located on the northwest wall, to the 

right of Door 8, is an enclosed brick fireplace that is 

finished with gypsum wallboard, wood, and paint. 

The firebox has been covered with corrugated 

metal. Overall, the fireplace is 66" wide and 253⁄4" 

deep from the exterior face of the mantelpiece to the 

back of the chimney breast. The top of the 

mantelpiece is 58" above the finished floor. The 

firebox measures 523⁄4" wide by 413⁄4" tall. The 

chimney breast is comprised of a series of decorative 

moldings. The chimney is covered in gypsum 

wallboard and measures 58" wide and 183⁄4" deep. 

See illustration for more detailed dimensions.

Electrical Fixtures. The only light fixture in Room 

103 is a ceiling fan with one single- bulb socket. This 

light fixture was installed sometime after 1937 but 

appears to date to within the period of significance. 

Other fixtures include three electrical outlet cover 

plates mounted on the baseboards and one light 

switch plate located to the left of Door 6.

Room 104

Ceiling. The height of the ceiling in Room 104 is 

10’- 93⁄4" above the finished floor . The ceiling is 

comprised of the exposed underside of the attic 

floor framing and flooring. The attic flooring 

exposed in this room runs northwest to southeast 

and varies in width. See Attic Flooring Table included 

later in this report for detailed dimensions. The 

boards span 31⁄4" by 43⁄4" joists that run northeast to 

southwest and are spaced at approximately 33" on a 

center. There is a 3⁄4" bead on both sides of the joists, 

along the bottom edge. The ceiling is painted white.

Flooring. The flooring is 53⁄4" tongue- and- groove 

pine boards running northeast to southwest. The 

FIGURE 51. Mantel at fireplace #2 in Room floorboards are unfinished.

103.

4'-10"

5'-61

4"

3'-51

2"

4'-101

4"

2'-31

2"

31

2"3

111

2"

5'-61

4"

31

4"3

11

2"1 1"

11

4"1

11

4"1

FIGURE 52. Ceiling in Room 103.
National Park Service 73

Part I: Developmental History

Walls. The walls in Room 104 are of bousillage 

construction and are finished with gypsum 

wallboard and paint. Along the base of these walls 

are baseboards measuring 6" by 4/4" thick and 

finished with 3⁄4" quarter- round molding. 

Fireplace. The fireplace in Room 104 (Fireplace #1) 

is located on the northwest wall to the right of Door 

10. This fireplace has been completely enclosed with 

gypsum wallboard. Because the fireplace was 

inaccessible, no further information about it could 

be obtained. Electrical and Heating Fixtures. The 

only light fixture in Room 104 is a five- light 

chandelier. This light fixture was installed sometime 

after 1937 but appears to date to within the period of 

significance. Other fixtures in this room include 

three electrical outlet cover plates and one 

telephone jack mounted on the baseboards, and one 

light switch plate located to the left of Door 10. 

Located to the right of the fireplace and 

approximately 4" from the wall is a 1" hole in the 

floor, which, presumably, once held the gas supply.

Room 105

Ceiling. The height of the ceiling in Room 105 

above the finished floor ranges from 10’- 113⁄4" at the 

southwest wall to 11’- 1" at the northeast wall. The 

ceiling is comprised of the exposed underside of the 

attic floor framing and flooring. The attic flooring 

exposed in this room runs northwest to southeast 

and varies in width. See Attic Flooring Table included 

later in this report for detailed dimensions. The 

boards span 33⁄4" by 3" joists that run northeast to 

southwest and are spaced at approximately 33" on 

center. The ceiling is painted white.

Flooring. The flooring includes three layers of 

multi- patterned asphaltic- based flooring laid over 

33⁄4" tongue- and- groove pine boards running 

northeast to southwest. The floorboards are 

unfinished. 

Walls. The southwest and northwest walls are of 

bousillage construction and are finished with 

gypsum wallboard and paint The northeast and 

southeast walls were constructed when the 

northeast porch was enclosed to create Room 105 

and are comprised of horizontally- aligned, 

circular- sawn, butt- jointed boards finished with 

gypsum wallboard and paint. Along the base of all 

the walls in Room 105 are baseboards measuring 7"

FIGURE 53. Room 104, ceiling joist (note 

bead), beam and exposed bousillage

beneath gypsum wallboard. 

FIGURE 54. Floor in Room 105.

FIGURE 55. Fireplace #2 in Room 103.
74 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

by 4/4" thick and finished with 3⁄4" quarter- round 

molding.

Electrical, Plumbing, and Heating Fixtures. The 

only light fixture in Room 105 is a single- bulb light 

suspended on a chain from the ceiling. This light 

fixture was installed sometime after 1937 but 

appears to date to within the period of significance. 

A unique fixture in this room is a punkah fly fan 

mounted on the ceiling in the center of the room 

which may date to the period when the Hertzogs 

were using the building as a home. Multiple kitchen 

cabinets and a sink are located along the northeast 

wall between windows 5 and 6. An electrical outlet 

cover plate is mounted on the baseboard to the left 

of Door 13. 

Room 106

Attic Stairs. The attic is accessed through Room 

106 via a quarter- turn staircase. A door is located at 

the upper landing in Room 106. The stairs of the first 

leg of the staircase are comprised of six 63⁄4" risers 

and five 83⁄4" treads. The railing consists of 3⁄4" by 3⁄4" 

square balusters, a 31⁄4" by 4" handrail and a 33⁄4" by 

33⁄4" newel post. The side of the staircase is finished 

with 53⁄4" beaded boards. The landing at the top of 

the fir staircase measures 4’- 6" wide and is 

comprised of 83⁄4" treads and 7" risers. The southeast 

interior wall of the second leg of the staircase is 

finished with vertical, tongue- and- groove boards 

measuring from 43⁄4" to 7" wide.

Ceiling. The height of the ceiling in Room 106 is 

10’- 93⁄4" above the finished floor. The ceiling is 

comprised of the exposed underside of the attic 

floor framing and flooring. The attic flooring 

exposed in this room runs northwest to southeast 

and varies in width. See Attic Flooring Table included 

later in this report for detailed dimensions. The 

boards span 33⁄4" by 3" joists that run northeast to 

southwest and are spaced at approximately 33" on 

center. The ceiling is painted white.

Flooring. The flooring is 31⁄4", tongue- and- groove 

pine boards running northwest to southeast. The 

floorboards are unfinished.

Walls. The southwest and northeast walls in Room 

106 are of bousillage construction and finished with 

gypsum wallboard and paint The northwest and 

southeast walls are of frame construction and 

FIGURE 56. Cabinets and sink in Room 105.

FIGURE 57. Punkah in Room 105.

FIGURE 58. East corner of Room 106.
National Park Service 75

Part I: Developmental History

finished with gypsum wallboard and paint. Along 

the base of all the walls are baseboards measuring 6" 

by 4/4" thick, with a small bead along the top edge 

and finished with 3⁄4" quarter- round molding. 

Electrical Fixtures. The only light fixture in Room 

106 is a pendant- type, single- light socket 

suspended from a ceiling joist. This light fixture was 

installed sometime after 1937 but appears to date to 

the period of significance. A light switch plate is 

located to the left of Door 3.

Room 107

Ceiling. The height of the ceiling in Room 107 

varies from 9’- 33⁄4" in the main portion sloping to 

2’- 5" under the attic stairs. The ceiling is comprised 

of gypsum wallboard and is painted. 

Flooring. The flooring is 33⁄4", tongue- and- groove 

pine boards running northwest to southeast. The 

floorboards are unfinished.

Walls. The walls are finished with gypsum 

wallboard and paint. Along the base of the 

southwest and northwest walls are baseboards 

measuring 6" by 4/4" thick, with a small bead along 

the top edge and finished with 3⁄4" quarter- round 

molding. A shelf comprised of a 73⁄4" by 3⁄4" board 

supported by a 3⁄4" quarter- round molding is 

located on the southwest wll at approximately 6’-

73⁄4" above the finished floor. The upper portion of 

northeast wall is sloped to accommodate the attic 

stairs located adjacent to and above this room.

Electrical Fixtures. There are no electrical fixtures 

in this room.

Room 108

A 2’- 3 3⁄4" by 6’- 0" closet (108A) is located in the east 

corner of Room 108, along the northeast wall.

Ceiling. The height of the ceiling in Room 108 is 

10’- 83⁄4" above the finished floor. The ceiling is 

comprised of the eflooring. The attic flooring 

exposed in this room runs northwest to southeast 

and varies in width. See Attic Flooring Table included 

later in this report for detailed dimensions. The 

boards span 33⁄4" by 23⁄4" joists that run northeast to 

southwest and are spaced at approximately 29" on 

center. The ceiling is painted white.

Flooring. The flooring is 33⁄4", tongue- and- groove 

pine boards running southwest to northeast. The 

floorboards are unfinished.

Walls. The southwest, southeast, and northeast 

walls are of bousillage construction finished with 

FIGURE 59. Attic stairs in Room 106.

FIGURE 60. Room 107, note shelf on southwest 

wall.
76 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

gypsum board and paint. The northwest wall of the 

room and the northwest and southwest wall of the 

closet are of frame construction and finished with 

gypsum wallboard and paint. Along the base of the 

walls, except for along the interior of the closet 

walls, areaseboards measuring 63⁄4" by 4/4" thick, 

with a small bead along the top edge and finished 

with 3⁄4" quarter- round molding. The baseboards 

along the closet walls measure 33⁄4" by 3⁄4". 

Electrical Fixtures . The only light fixture in Room 

108 is a pendant- type, single- light socket suspended 

from a ceiling joist. This light fixture was installed 

sometime after 1937 but appears to date to within the 

period of significance. The switch to the light is a 

pull chain on the pendant light. An electrical outlet 

cover plate is in the floor near the southeast wall. 

Room 109

Ceiling. The height of the ceiling in Room 109 is 6’-

83⁄4" above the finished floor. The ceiling is finished 

with gypsum wallboard and paint.

Flooring. The flooring is sheet linoleum. 

Walls. The northwest, southwest, and northeast 

walls are bousillage construction finished with 

gypsum board and paint. 

Fixtures. There is a free- standing bathtub, soap 

dish, and toilet located along the northwest wall. 

Above the tub is a wall- mounted towel rack. A sink 

is located on the eastern end of the northeast wall. 

Above the sink is a wall- mounted light fixture and 

medicine cabinet. This light fixture was installed 

sometime after 1937 but appears to date to within the 

period of significance. Shelves are located on the 

western end of the southwest wall. The sink, tub, 

and toilet appear to be of the same vintage as the 

bathroom fixtures located in The Cottage at 

Oakland Plantation. The installation of the fi 1920s. 

Given their similar appearance, it is possible that the 

bath fixtures in the Overseer’s House date to this 

time period as well. However, it is unclear whether 

these fixtures were installed during the 1920s or 

simply manufactured at that time and installed in 

the Overseer’s House at a later date. 

Room 110

Ceiling. The height of the ceiling in Room 110 is 11’-

113⁄4" above the finished floor. The ceiling is 

FIGURE 61. Room 108, ceiling.

FIGURE 62. Room 109, sink.

FIGURE 63. Room 109, bath tub.
National Park Service 77

Part I: Developmental History

comprised of butt- jointed boards measuring 11" 

wide and running northeast to southwest over 

exposed joists. The ceiling joists measure 2" by 6" 

boards that exposes a metal panel with a hole in the 

center. The hole may have once accommodated a 

stovepipe.

Flooring. The flooring is 113⁄4" tongue- and- groove 

pine boards running southwest to northeast. The 

floorboards are unfinished.

Walls. The northwest, northeast, and southeast 

walls are the exposed framing members and 

backside of the exterior, 53⁄4" butt- jointed board 

siding. The southwest wall is the historic exterior

wall surface of Rooms 108 and 109. The dimensions 

and types of boards vary on all sides of Door 18. To 

the right of Door 18, the siding is 3⁄4" thick clapboards 

with a 63⁄4" exposure; above the door, the siding is 3⁄4" 

rough- sawn clapboard siding with a 5" exposure; 

and to the left of the door, the siding is 73⁄4" circularsawn, butt- jointed boards.

All the siding on the southwest wall is whitewashed. 

The siding on the southwest wall is historic and not 

part of the replacement wall clapboards recently 

installed by the National Park Service. Leading to

Door 18 is a set of stairs comprised of two stringers, 

three risers and three treads. The risers vary in 

height from 63⁄4" to 8" and the treads measure 11" 

wide by 4/4" thick.

Fixtures. Mounted on the southeast wall 

approximately 5’- 1" above the finished floor is a 5" 

by 1" board used for hanging tools.

Room 111

Ceiling. The height of the ceiling in Room 111 is 8’-

2" above the finished floor. The ceiling is comprised 

of gypsum wallboard over 31⁄4" tongue- and- groove, 

beaded boards running southwest to northeast. The 

ceiling is painted.

Flooring. The flooring on the southwest end of the 

room is 6" tongue- and- groove pine boards running 

southeast to northwest. The flooring on the 

northeast end of the room is 33⁄4" boards running 

northeast to southwest. The floorboards are 

unfinished.

. 

FIGURE 64. Ceiling, Room 110, showing 

stovepipe hole.

FIGURE 65. Northwest wall, Room 110.
78 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

Walls. The walls are finished with gypsum 

wallboard and paint. There are 53⁄4" by 4/4" 

baseboards along the bottom of the wall. 

Electrical Fixtures. The only light fixture in Room 

111 is a ceramic, single- bulb socket mounted over 

Door 20. This light fixture was installed sometime 

after 1937 but appears to date to within the period of 

significance. There is a duplex electrical outlet 

mounted on the southeast wall to the right of door 

20, 4’- 1" above the finished floor. 

Attic

The chimneys of the four fireplaces located in the 

main building protrude through the attic flooring 

and are encased in framing. Fireplace 2 and 3, 

located in Rooms 103 and 102, respectively, share a 

chimney with two flues. The chimney has been 

partly enclosed with plywood. 

Ceiling. The height of the attic, at the ridge beam is 

12’- 0". There is no finished ceiling in the attic.

Walls. The walls of the attic are the exposed 

backsides of the roof framing and roofing lath. 

According to historic photographs, presumed to 

have been taken in the 1940s and 1950s, two dormers 

once existed on the southwest roof of the main 

building. When the contractor for the National Park 

Service reconstructed the roof structure, all framing 

for these dormers was removed.

Structural Evaluation

The Overseer’s House floor system was modeled in 

Visual Analysis 5.0 using structural elements defined 

from field measurements and actual beam sizes. A 

structural analysis was performed on the floor and 

roof system and checked for compliance with the 

2000 International Building Code based on flexure, 

shear, and deflection criteria. Because the National 

Park Service wishes to interpret the interior of the 

Overseer’s House to the public, the live loads listed 

in the 2000 International Building Code Table 1607.1 

for assembly areas and theaters with fixed seats and 

for walkways, 60 psf in both cases, would be the 

upper limit of the live loads to which the structure 

would be subjected. A weight of 3 psf plus the actual 

weight of the wood members was used to represent 

the dead load. The results of this analysis show that 

all framing members and connections for the main 

floor are adequate for 60 psf public access loading 

as required by current building codes, even in 

locations where the beams have been deeply 

notched to recee tenon joints. 

The roof rafters were also analyzed for compliance 

with current building codes. Based on the IBC and 

taking into account the roof slope, the roof has to 

span of 13.6 feet between supports. The results of the 

analysis show that the roof rafters are adequate to 

support the minimum required roof loading as well 

as the typical wind loading of 10.7 psf required by 

the IBC. The roof rafters are supported by posts 

FIGURE 66. Shelf on southeast wall of Room 

110.

FIGURE 67. Northeast wall, Room 111.
National Park Service 79

Part I: Developmental History

support a live load of 10.2 psf. The existing rafters 

are nominally 3x4s spaced at 3’- 0" on center, with a 

that bear on a nominal 2x4 beam resting on the floor 

boards. However, this beam does not carry a 

significant amount of the roof load and is not 

necessary for the transferring of load since it rests 

atop the floor boards. These floor boards are the 

ceiling of the rooms below and rest on joists 

installed at right angles to the boards and bearing on 

the walls of the first level. The roof loads are thus 

transferred from the ridge beam to the posts, then to 

the attic floor boards and from them to the joists. 

The 3x4 joists spaced 3’- 0" on center were analyzed 

to determine if they could carry the roof loads and 

found to be adequate. Although the central 2x4 

beam has some termite damage, this does not pose a 

significant danger to the structursince the beam 

does not affect the transferring of loads. 

The attic floor framing is similar to the roof framing. 

The attic floor framing is comprised of 3x4 beams 

spaced at 3’- 0" on center, with the longest span 

being 19 feet. Based on an approximate allowable 

bending stress of 1500 psi, the maximum load that 

the attic floor can support is approximately 8 psf. 

Without substantial reinforcing, the attic cannot 

support the loads required for public access. The 

additional reinforcing of the attic would be costly 

and detrimental to the historic presentation of the 

house; therefore, the Park Service should not allow 

visitors or personnel into the attic. If no visitors are 

allowed in the attic and no additional loads are 

imposed on the attic floor, no further reinforcement 

is necessary, and the attic is adequate in its existing 

condition for its current use.

Summary of 

Materials Analysis

As part of the materials analysis conducted for the 

Overseer’s House in 1996, samples of bousillage and 

paint were taken. The bousillage sample was taken 

from the interior northwest wall of the attic stairwell 

and was found to be composed of red clay with a 

Spanish Moss binder. No lime was found in the 

bousillage. As part of the paint analysis, more than 

176 samples of paint were obtained from the house. 

For the purposes of determining the paint finishes 

Legend for Flooring Plan:

Area on Floor Dimension of Flooring

A 4-1/2” to 9-1/2”

B 7” to 7-1/2”

C 4-3/4” to 9”

D 5-1/4” to 7-1/2”

E 4-1/2” to 9-1/2”

F 4-1/2” to 7-1/2”

G 8-1/2” to 5-1/4”

H 7-1/2” to 5-1/4”

I 5-1/2” to 8”

J 6-1/4” to 9”

K 6” to 8”

L 4-3/4” to 9”

M 4-3/4”-9”

N 5” -7”

O 6” -7-1/2”

P 5” to 8-1/2”

Q 5” to 6-1/2”

R 4-1/2” to 7”

S 4-1/2” to 7”

FIGURE 68. Details of attic flooring.
80 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

Physical Description

relative to the circa 1960 period of significance, an 

addendum to the paint analysis was written in 

August of 2002. It is curious that the findings in the 

2002 report dating the circa 1960 finishes differ from 

the current paint finishes in the house with only one 

exception, those in Room 108. However, the 

findings dating the circa 1950s finishes discussed in 

the 1996 report more closely match the current paint 

finishes. The following represents the findings of the 

Paint Analysis and the 2002 amendment to it 

showing the most recent finish from these reports. 

Exterior

Foundations Piers: Whitewash 

Gallery Floor: Light Gray 

Gallery Wall Trim: Dark Green 

Gallery Walls: Whitewash 

Exterior Walls of Main Building (beneath asphalt 

siding): Whitewash 

Exterior Walls of Wing Additions (beneath asphalt 

siding): Whitewash 

Door Trim: Dark Green and White

Doors: Dark Green and White

Window Trim: Dark Green

Windows: White

Shutters: Dark Green

Gallery Ceiling: White

Loose Gate (Railing?): Dark Green

Interior

Room 101

Walls: Light Green

Trim: Cream/Tan

Windows/Trim: Cream/Tan

Doors/Trim: Cream/Tan

Fireplace Mantel: Cream/Tan

Ceiling: Cream/Tan

Room 102

Walls: Light Pink

Trim: Cream/Tan

Windows/Trim: Light Pink, Cream/Tan

Doors/Trim: Light Pink, Cream/Tan

Fireplace Mantel: Cream/Tan

Ceiling: Cream/Tan

Room 103

Walls: Cream/Yellow

Trim: Cream/Yellow

Windows/Trim: Cream/Tan

Doors/Trim: Cream/Tan

Fireplace Mantel: Cream/Tan

Ceiling: Cream/Tan

Room 104

Walls: Light Gray

Trim: Light Gray

Windows/Trim: Light Gray

Doors/Trim: Light Gray, Cream/Tan

Ceiling: Cream/Tan

Room 105

Walls: Light Pink

Trim: Light Pink

Windows/Trim: Light Pink

Doors/Trim: Light Pink

Ceiling: Cream/Tan

Punkah: Cream/Tan

Room 106

Walls: Light Green

Trim: Light Green

Windows/Trim: Light Green, White

Doors/Trim: Light Green

Staircase: Light Green

Ceiling: Light Green

Room 107:

Walls: White

Trim: White

Doors/Trim: White, Light Green

Room 108

Walls: Light Yellow

Trim: Light Yellow

Doors/Trim: White, Light Yellow

Ceiling: White

No paint samples were taken from Rooms 109, 110.
National Park Service 81

The Overseer’s House has a varied past. Believed by 

the National Park Service to have been constructed 

as a slave hospital, the building was adapted as a 

residence for the plantation owners after fire 

destroyed the main house. The structure was later 

used to house plantation overseers. The existing 

building retains characteristics of all three periods 

of occupation, from the abandoned mortises for 

bars in the original window openings of the slave 

hospital to the wing additions added as part of the 

modification of the building for use as a residence 

for the plantation owners, to the later introduction 

of gypsum wallboard and modern kitchen furnishings by a resident overseer. 

Located midway between the slave quarters and the 

main plantation house, the Overseer’s House physically communicates its place in the hierarchy of 

plantation authority. It is set back from the plantation outbuildings and worker housing that are strategically set along the road, emphasizing the wealth 

and good fortune of the plantation owner. The 

Overseer’s House is set on a higher foundation than 

other outbuildings, a physical manifestation of the 

social role of its owner throughout its history. 

In consideration of its earliest use, it is possible the 

building was constructed in this manner as a means 

of relaying the plantation owners concern for the 

welfare of his slaves. As discussed in John Michael 

Vlach’s Back of the Big House, historian Eugene 

Genovese noted that the care of plantation slaves 

improved between 1831 and 1861, as a means of fostering a more stable environment.3

 The construction of a proper hospital to treat ill slaves was meant 

to be seen as a measure of good faith from the plantation owner to the slave. Vlach remarks that this 

tactic was mostly propaganda to quell the unruly 

slave and that the purpose was more likely a means 

of protecting the owner’s investment in slave labor. 

The owner’s family members and the overseers 

often staffed slave hospitals. Some plantation owners, such as Phanor Prud’homme of Oakland Plantation, also housed a resident physician. There is no 

census data to suggest that the LeComtes and Hertzogs followed suit, however. Architectural details 

such as the three- sided gallery reflected the prevailing Creole style of the area.

The later uses of the Overseer’s House are reflected 

in its residential characteristics. The expansion of 

the original rooms and the partitioning of the ward 

room, the enclosure of part of the gallery, and the 

addition of the two wings to provide for additional 

living space all shed light on the evolving living conditions of the post- bellum plantation family and 

twentieth century plantation overseers. Significant 

changes continued to be made to the Overseer’s 

House throughout the last period of occupancy. 

The General Management Plan has designated the 

Overseer’s House for exhibit space and some limited storage. The historic character of the Overseer’s 

House serves as a suitable resource in which to 

focus not only the interpretation of the history of 

this building, but how plantation life evolved in various ways based on the needs of the time throughout the periods of labor- based agriculture. The 

proposed use for the Overseer’s House is appropriate to the interpretation of the overall historic context of Magnolia Plantation.

The General Management Plan has established the 

period of significance for Magnolia Plantation to be 

the duration of agricultural activities through about 

3. Vlach, p. 142. 1960. The physical character of the Overseer’s 

Treatment and Use
82 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

House as it was circa1960 is substantially intact, with 

some notable exceptions. The modifications to the 

building from its character circa 1960 primarily 

constitute those made by contractors for the 

National Park Service to the roof framing, foundation piers, and exterior siding. The treatment of the 

roof framing and exterior siding appears to vary 

from the historic characteristics of the circa 1960 

structure. The following are representative of the 

building’s character at the end of the period of significance, circa 1960.

Exterior 

Conditions

■ A single rail fence surrounded the Overseer’s 

House on all sides. Historic photographs of the 

Overseer’s House believed to date to the 1940s 

indicate that this fence once had pickets nailed 

to the rails.

■ The exterior southwest, northwest and 

northeast walls of the main building that are 

not protected by the gallery, as well as the 

exterior walls of the two additions, excluding 

the southeast wall of the Room 111 wing, were 

finished with granulated, rolled, and textured 

asphalt siding. Oral history dates the 

installation of the asphalt siding to between 

1959 and 1961 when the George Lynn family 

occupied the house. Beneath the asphalt finish 

was flush board siding. Based upon reasonable 

evidence, it is believed that this siding was 

originally installed as lapped boards, which 

were whitewashed. Later, this siding was 

removed and reconfigured with butt joints to 

provide a smooth, flush surface over which the 

asphalt paper could be applied. As part of the 

modifications made to the house in 1998, a 

contractor for the National Park Service 

installed clapboard siding on the exterior walls 

of the main building not protected by the 

gallery. This siding presents an appearance that 

predates 1959, which is inconsistent with the 

proposed interpretative goals. Additionally, the 

replacement siding covers Doors 2 and 3 and 

Window 3, all of which were existing and 

expressed on both the interior and exterior 

elevations circa 1960. Further, a circa- 1950s 

photograph reveals that a vertical board was 

installed on the southwest exterior wall of 

Room 101 that divided the original portion of 

this wall from the later extension. This corner 

board was not replicated in the current siding 

treatment. 

■ The exterior bousillage and clapboard exterior 

walls of the main building and the Room 111 

addition, both protected by the gallery, were 

whitewashed. According to the Materials 

Analysis, the window and door trim on the 

exterior walls of the main building protected 

by the gallery was painted dark green. The 

window and door trim on the exterior walls of 

the main building not protected by the gallery 

was painted white. While the Materials 

Analysis does not identify the painted finishes 

for the interior of Room 109 and both the 

interior and exterior of Rooms 110 and 111, 

photographs dating to circa 1950 and 1996 

reveal that the exterior window and door 

casings on the wing additions were painted 

white. 

■ Wood shutters were mounted at each of the 

exterior windows beneath the gallery on the 

main building. 

■ The foundation piers on the main building and 

wing additions were whitewashed.

■ Lattice underpinning was installed along the 

southwest elevation of the main building of the 

Overseer’s House. 

■ The roofing on the main building and the two 

additions was metal. A circa 1940 photograph 

of the Overseer’s House shows the roofing on 

the main building to be 5- V metal. 

Photographs taken by the National Park 

Service in 1996 show both the main building 

and the Room 111 wing with 5- V metal roofing. 

This latter photograph conflicts with some of 

the information provided in both the 1986 

HABS drawings and in Barbara Yocum’s 1996 

Materials Analysis. The HABS drawings 

illustrate the presence of corrugated metal on 

both the main building and the Room 110 

addition and 5V- metal on the Room 111 

addition. Barbara Yocum’s Materials Analysis 

identifies the roofing on all three buildings as 
National Park Service 83

corrugated. However, a photograph of the 

southwest elevation of the main building 

included in Yocum’s report shows the roofing 

to be 5- V metal. There were no photographs of 

the Room 110 addition provided in Yocum’s 

report. It is probable that the metal roofing was 

replaced several times throughout the history 

of the building. However, the known existing 

photographs of the building dating from circa 

1940 and 1996, suggest that the roofing on the 

Overseer’s House in circa 1960 was 5- V metal.

■ The gallery on the Room 111 addition connected 

with the northeast exterior wall of the main 

building.

■ Door 3, in the northeast wall of Room 106, was 

accessible from the gallery of the Room 111 

addition. A roof existed over the exterior of 

Door 3. 

■ Door 2 and Window 3 existed in the northwest 

wall of Room 102 and were expressed on both 

the interior and exterior of the building. Door 

2 had both a board- and- batten door and a 

screen door hanging in the opening.

■ Door 4, in the southeast wall of Room 105, had 

two doors hanging in the opening, a multilight, stile- and- rail door and a screened door. 

Above the door opening was a multi- light 

transom.

■ Chimneys on the main building were 

whitewashed.

■ The framing for the two dormers that were 

located on the southwest side of the roof on the 

main building still existed in the attic. Oral 

history dates the removal of these dormers to 

before 1959. A circa- 1950s photograph shows 

them on the southwest elevation of the roof. A 

photograph believed to date to the 1940s 

reveals that each dormer was finished with 

clapboard siding on the exterior, had a gabled 

roof, and had board- and- batten shutters with 

strap hinges. As part of the treatments 

completed for the house in 1998, a contractor 

for the National Park Service rebuilt part of the 

roof framing. Apparently at that time, the 

dormer framing was removed from the 

structure. 

■ Half- round gutters and downspouts were 

located on the two wing additions. This 

assertion is based upon information provided 

in the Design Analysis completed by the 

Denver Service Center in 2002.

■ According to a circa 1950s photograph, simple 

wood brackets existed at the top of the gallery 

columns, just beneath the roof. While these 

brackets were not documented in the 1996 

photographs taken of the house, it is possible 

that they were still in existence in 1960. 

■ Exterior steps were located at the southwest 

gallery on the main building. 

■ A balustrade spanned the gallery columns with 

a gated opening along the southwest gallery at 

the top of the exterior steps. It is likely this 

balustrade and gate were still intact in 1960. 

Interior 

Conditions

■ The existing floorboards in the main building 

were in place. Oral history dates the 

installation of this flooring to between 1959 and 

1961 when the George Lynn family occupied 

the house.

■ The interior walls of the main building, 

including the entire fireplace in Room 104, but 

excluding the interior of the attic stairwell, 

were clad in gypsum wallboard. Oral history 

dates the installation of this interior finish to 

between 1959 and 1961 when the George Lynn 

family occupied the house. The National Park 

Service has recently installed temporary 

expanded polystyrene insulation board on the 

northwest interior wall of Room 102. Because 

the underlying wall finish is not accessible, it is 

unknown if the gypsum wallboard exists 

beneath this material. However, according to 

National Park Service staff, the wall originally 

contained bousillage which collapsed and was 

gathered into buckets by the National Park 

Service and stored in the Carriage Shed.
84 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

■ The interior of the main building, the Room 111 

addition, and portions of the Room 110 

addition had painted finishes. 

■ Abandoned mortises that once held vertical 

bars dating to the antebellum period existed in 

the windows and transoms in Rooms 103 and 

104.

■ The staircase in Room 106 that led to the attic 

existed in its current configuration and 

condition.

■ A bathroom, Room 109, was located in the 

north corner of the main building.

■ A closet, Room 108a, was located in Room 108 

of the main building. Oral history dates the 

installation of this closet to between 1959 and 

1961 when the George Lynn family occupied 

the house.

■ Cabinets existed along the northeast interior 

wall of Room 106. Oral history dates the 

installation of these cabinets to between 1959 

and 1961, when the George Lynn family 

occupied the house.

Requirements for 

Treatment and Use

The primary requirement for use of the Overseer’s 

house for exhibits and interpretation is to treat the 

building consistently with the circa 1960 period of 

significance as established in the General Management Plan. The appropriate treatment will be to 

protect and restore the documented conditions and 

finishes in the structure for inclusion in the interpretive program for Magnolia Plantation. The 

interpretive program will explain the role of the 

Overseer’s House as it was used for a slave hospital, 

as a residence for the plantation owners, and, later, 

as a home for the overseers.

Treatment of the building should be guided by the 

International Building Code, including that code’s 

statement regarding historic buildings:

3406.1 Historic Buildings. The provisions of 

this code related to the construction, repair, 

alteration, addition, restoration and movement 

of structures, and change of occupancy shall not 

be mandatory for historic buildings where such 

buildings are judged by the building official to 

not constitute a distinct life safety hazard.

Threats to public health and safety will be eliminated, but because this is an historic building, alternatives to full code compliance are recommended 

where compliance would needlessly compromise 

the integrity of the historic building.

Applicable Laws

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation 

Act (NHPA) mandates that federal agencies, 

including the National Park Service, take into 

account the effects of their actions on properties 

listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and give the Advisory 

Council on Historic Preservation a reasonable 

opportunity to comment. NHPA regulations (36 

CFR 800.10) mandate special requirements for protection of National Historic Landmarks. Section 

110(f) of the Act requires that the Agency Official, to 

the maximum extent possible, undertake such 

planning and actions as may be necessary to minimize harm to any National Historic Landmark that 

may be directly and adversely affected by any 

undertaking.

The National Park Service’s "Cultural Resource 

Management Guideline" (DO028) requires planning for the protection of cultural resources 

whether or not they relate to the specific authorizing legislation or interpretive programs of the parks 

in which they lie. The Overseer’s House should be 

understood in its own cultural context and managed in light of its own value, as well as that of Magnolia Plantation as a whole, so that it may be 

preserved and rehabilitated, unimpaired, for the 

enjoyment of present and future generations. To 

help guide compliance with these statutes and regulations, the Secretary of the Interior has issued 

Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. 

The National Park Service’s Preservation Briefs also 

provide detailed guidelines for appropriate treatment of a variety of materials, features and conditions found in historic buildings.

Functional Requirements

Using the Overseer’s House for exhibits and limited 

storage, as prescribed in the General Management 
National Park Service 85

Plan, will require several actions to return the 

building to its appropriate circa 1960 character and 

condition as well as provide for public accessibility. 

These actions include the reversal of some of the 

modifications made by contractors for the National 

Park Service and others. The following measures 

are recommended for the building to meet its established use expectations.

■ Remove the existing clapboard siding and 

install an unpatterned, granulated, rolled 

asphalt siding of a similar and compatible color 

to the existing historic, patterned, asphalt 

siding on the exterior walls of the two 

additions.

■ Doors 2 and 3 and Window 3 should be 

reopened to the exterior, as indicated in the 

1986 HABS drawings and the 1996 National 

Park Service photographs. 

■ All missing doors and transoms should be 

reconstructed to match the historic circa 1960 

appearance.

■ Using photographic documentation, rebuild the 

exterior steps from the ground to the 

southwest gallery of the house to match the 

circa 1960 profile.

■ Restore the gallery balustrade and gated 

opening.

■ Repair, refinish, and re- hang the exterior 

shutters currently stored in the house. 

■ Reconstruct the gallery on the southeast 

elevation of the Room 111 addition and the 

stairs at the northeast end of this gallery as 

illustrated in the 1986 HABS drawings. 

■ Restore the brick piers and fireplace 

foundations interior to the main building. 

■ Repair parging on the brick piers beneath the 

main building and two wing additions. 

■ Restore the ornamental brackets on the 

columns supporting the gallery roof of the 

main building.

■ Remove the polystyrene insulation board from 

the northwest interior wall of Room 102 and 

reveal Door 2 and Window 3 to the interior of 

this room as illustrated in the 1986 HABS 

drawings.

Human Safety

With the actions addressed in the other sections of 

this document, no significant health safety issues 

were identified. 

Fire Protection

The primary risk of fire include the current use of 

Room 101 and 102 as a painting room, the proposed 

use of a portion of the house for storage, and other 

conditions external to the building provided the 

house remains secure from vandals. These limits of 

risk assume the prescribed wiring improvements, 

which include installing new wiring to restore the 

historic light fixtures to their appropriate use. This 

recommendation assumes the new wiring would be 

implemented prior to occupancy for the proposed 

General Management Plan use. 

As recommended in the Design Analysis, smoke 

detectors and an alarm system should be installed in 

each room, in the closet, and in the attic. In addition, a dry sprinkler system has been recommended 

in the Design Analysis. The introduction of a dry 

sprinkler system into the house will have an impact 

on the rooms designated to accommodate the vertical riser and on the attic. Because there are no concealed ceiling conditions in the structure, the lateral 

pipes of a sprinkler system will either have to be 

installed exposed in the attic with only the heads 

penetrating the historic ceiling boards or exposed at 

the ceiling of the first floor. Operationally, running 

all the piping in the attic will not have a significant 

impact on the interpretation of the building, as 

access to the attic will not be allowed in the proposed General Management Plan use of the structure. However, the damage to the historic ceiling/

attic flooring to insert the system will be notable. 

There is likely insufficient water pressure available 

to the site to support a sprinkler system. Consequently, a fire pump and, possibly, a storage tank 

would be required to create a functional system. 

These features will have to be concealed on the site 

or be left exposed and would, therefore, be an 

intrusion into the historic setting. The issue with the 

proposed fire suppression system is the complexity 
86 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

and cost of introducing such a system to the Overseer’s House in light of the proposed use. The 

impact and cost of the system is not warranted if the 

following measures are taken:

■ The building has a smoke detection and alarm 

system.

■ The limited storage proposed for the house 

does not include storage of flammable items.

■ The building is secured from vandalism.

■ The exhibit contents are replaceable. 

■ The visitor occupancy of the house is under 

docent control.

■ A fire response plan is established with the 

appropriate portable extinguishers and other 

support equipment. 

■ The staff is trained in implementing the fire 

response plan.

Therefore, unless there is significant concern of fire 

from vandalism in the off hours, the sprinkler system is not recommended.

Energy Conservation

Because of the proposed interior uses, the Design 

Analysis has recommended that the main building 

be heated. As prescribed, the heating system would 

consist of installing electric baseboard heaters in all 

of the interior rooms except for Room 111 and the 

attic. This treatment is substantially reversible and 

would have minimal impact on the historic character of the building. Mechanical air conditioning systems will not be installed in the building. Cooling 

will be by the existing ceiling fans and through natural air circulation via the windows and doors. 

Abatement of Hazardous Materials

Based on the materials analysis completed for the 

Overseer’s House, it is known that some of the interior and exterior painted finishes contain lead. 

Considering the proposed approach to treatment, 

that of retaining the finish history up to 1960, it is 

recommended that the lead paint be managed during this process. The painted finishes should be 

managed in place using a technique such as monitored wet sanding to protect the historic characteristics of the building. 

Handicapped Accessibility

Providing accessibility to the house in accordance 

with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) will 

require a physical response and tailoring of the 

interpretative program to ensure the minimum 

visual and physical impact on the historic character 

of the property. There are six exterior doors that 

can be considered for providing ADA- compliant 

access: Doors 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 19. The remaining 

exterior doors, Doors 1, 20, and 21, either do not 

meet the minimum width requirements for ADA 

access or do not provide access to the entire house. 

The gallery was accessed via steps on the southwest 

side. The finished floor of the southwest gallery is 

approximately 4’- 0" above the adjacent prevailing 

elevation of the ground. There are three exterior 

doors that can provide ADA- compliant access from 

the gallery to the interior of the house: Doors 4, 5, 

and 6. Exterior Door 2, located on the northwest 

side of the house, is also approximately 4’- 0" above 

grade. However, it is currently covered by the 

replacement clapboard siding installed by the 

National Park Service. The threshold of Door 19, 

located on the northeast exterior elevation of the 

Room 110 addition, is approximately 2’- 5" above 

grade. Door 3, currently covered by non- historic 

clapboard siding, can provide access from the 

Room 111 gallery. 

When considering the options for accessibility, 

there are two limiting conditions. All doors except 

Door 19 from Room 110 have thresholds approximately 4’- 0" above the prevailing ground level. The 

threshold of Door 19 is only 2’- 5" above grade, but 

an additional 1’- 7" in vertical distance required to 

get from Room 110 to the floor of the main structure 

in Room 108 must be accomplished within Room 110 

at Door 18. Using Room 110 for ADA- compliant 

access is not feasible given that a 19’- 0" ramp would 

be required to accomplish the 1’- 7" rise at Door 18. 

This is a distance greater than Room 110 can accommodate. The access alternatives that remain are 

those that must accommodate the 4’- 0" rise on the 

exterior of the building.

Given this limitation, the question arises as to which 

side of the house is most suited for the installation of 

an exterior ramp. A 4’- 0" rise requires a 48’- 0" long 
National Park Service 87

ramp, therefore, a portable ramp is not an option. 

While the southwest and southeast sides could 

accommodate a 48’- 0" ramp, it would significantly 

alter the historic view of the house from the primary 

visitor entrance and from the slave quarters. 

According to National Park Service officials, it is 

desirable to provide ADA access to the building 

along the northeast elevation, at Door 3. To accommodate a ramp at this location would require a 

switchback ramp that would also have a significant 

negative visual impact on the house and its additions from the slave quarters. This is a notable consideration, as the relationship between the building, 

historically serving as a slave hospital and the slave 

quarters is of intrinsic value to the overall history of 

Magnolia. Locating a ramp at the northeast elevation would detract from a full appreciation of the 

historic context of the building.

Alternatively, Door 2 provides the ability to install a 

ramp of required length that would not impact the 

historic views to and from the slave quarters. This 

side of the house is screened by the Carriage Shed 

and is oriented away from the primary visitor 

entrance to the Park. Door 2 also provides direct 

access to Room 102, one of the primary rooms 

scheduled for interpretation in the house. Consideration has been given to the design of such a ramp 

at the required 48’ length. A ramp of this length will 

introduce a significant visual change to any elevation of the building. Relative to the northwest elevation, it is therefore recommended that a switchback 

ramp be installed along the length of the exterior 

wall of the main building. See illustrations following. The proposed location would also facilitate 

access from the main entry walk, located at the 

southwest elevation of the building. This location 

would provide the shortest route from the main 

walk to the interior of the building with the minimum visual intrusion upon the historic character of 

the exterior.

Another option for providing access to the house is 

the installation of a lift. There are advantages and 

disadvantages to this option. First, the lift would 

have to be located on the exterior of the building to 

protect the historically important features and 

character of the structure. It would, therefore, be 

exposed to the elements. Exposed lifts, even those 

constructed for exterior applications, tend to operate less consistently and require more maintenance 

than those protected from the elements. A lift is 

certainly more compact than a 48" wide by 48’ long 

ramp and, thus, is somewhat, less intrusive to the 

building than a ramp. Even using a lift, Door 2 continues to be the preferred location for ADA accessibility in order to preserve the other more prominent 

and detailed views of the building. If Door 2 were 

the location of a lift, there would need to be a landing outside the door opening from which to unload 

the lift. The platform would need to meet ADA 

requirements for turning radius and railing protection. Given the requirements to accommodate a lift, 

the differences between the installation of a ramp or 

a lift are primarily operational ones. The ramp 

would be a somewhat larger structure though, if 

aligned parallel to the wall of the house, its impact 

would be minimized. It would be self- operating and 

would require only routine maintenance along with 

the rest of the structures in the park. The lift would 

require park personnel or visitor operation when 

used as well as regular mechanical maintenance to 

assure that it is available when needed. Therefore, it 

is recommended that the ramp be used as the means 

of ADA access to the house.

Based on the information provided in the Design 

Analysis, only Rooms 101, 102, 103, 104 and 105 will be 

made accessible to the public. All these rooms are 

currently ADA accessible, based upon the existing 

door widths. The only door between these rooms 

that currently does not meet the minimum required 

32" width is Door 1, located between the southwest 

gallery and Room 101. However, Room 101 is accessible from Room 102, through Door 7. The balance 

of the accessible doors between these rooms 

include Doors 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, and 12.

Alternatives for 

Treatment and Use

The proposed interpretative and limited exhibit use 

for the structure is operationally appropriate. The 

structure is an important one to interpret both from 

the interior and the exterior. Only the ADA requirements and Design Analysis fire protection proposal 

challenge this assignment of use and treatment. One 

alternative for use would be to interpret the structure from the exterior and not provide access to the 

interior. This is not desirable given the importance 
88 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

of the interior to understanding the varied uses of 

the building and how it responded to changing 

social characteristics and needs on the plantation. 

To address interpretation of the interior with no 

interior visitation, the "alternative minimum" 

approach to interpretation would be used to provide a visitor the opportunity to understand and 

"experience" the interior of the house through 

multimedia materials. These materials would be 

provided in an accessible location on site or in 

another building on the plantation. The media for 

such an approach could include a model of the 

house and a film or video of the interior interpretation program. 

The use of the building for storage is an issue worth 

addressing here. A general assignment of storage as 

an allowable use in the building is one that, over 

time, can progress to the point of damaging the 

structure and/or causing a fire hazard. The General 

Management Plan does not specify the location, 

type, or amount of storage proposed for the structure. However, the Design Analysis has proposed 

more specific uses of the interior rooms, e.g., chair 

storage, administrative functions, mechanical 

equipment, etc. Therefore, it is recommended that 

the assignment of a portion of the Overseer’s House 

for storage be clarified and narrowed to state that 

storage be limited to that which is in support of 

flexible programming. In essence, using portions of 

the building for storage should in no way have a 

negative impact upon the historic features of the 

building. While it is acceptable to use existing storage space within the building, such as the kitchen 

cabinets in Room 105 and the existing closet in 

Room 108, any additional storage units introduced 

to the building should be constructed and installed 

in a manner that neither alters nor impacts the historic fabric of the building. Additionally, it is of critical importance that neither the classification nor 

use of any part of the building precipitate a structural requirement beyond the capacity of the historic structure when evaluated in modern code 

terms. If there is a conflict, the use should be altered 

to remain within the acceptable tolerance of the 

historic structural components and assembly. It is 

crucial that any storage be limited to non- flammable items.

The introduction of electric baseboard heating 

units and a dry pipe fire suppression system places 

some significant limitations on several rooms in the 

house, not to mention on the historic fabric of the 

house. The alternatives of not having a fire suppression system and of limiting the heating system to a 

room or rooms assigned for administrative functions should be considered. This alternative would 

provide the optimum stewardship of the historic 

structure within the General Management Plan 

concept for interpretative use. The authors of this 

report recommend this alternative.

Ultimate 

Treatment and Use

The General Management Plan for the Cane River 

Creole National Park has established the period of 

significance for Oakland Plantation to be 1818 to 

1960. To secure the full spectrum of historic features 

and characteristics that remain for that period, the 

overarching approach to treatment is the preservation of all the layers of history in the Overseer’s 

House. Further, the General Management Plan also 

prescribes the use of the Overseer’s House to be 

primarily for interpretation, periodically for exhibits, and possibly for "some limited storage of materials." Based on historical documentation, field 

observations, and the analyses prepared by Ali Miri 

and Barbara Yocum, all the features of the house 

should be considered historic except for some of the 

recent stabilization work and reconstruction treatments, namely, parts of the roof framing, roofing, 

and clapboard siding. The Materials Analyses information contains discrepancies between the circa 

1950 and the circa 1960 finishes. The more detailed 

field samples from the original analysis, which were 

not available for reference in this Historic Structure 

Report, should be consulted in defining the final 

finish schedule for the house.
National Park Service 89

It is suggested in the General Management Plan 

that, at times, the public may be allowed in the 

Overseer’s House without interpretative staff 

supervision. This conclusion is due to the fact that 

the proposed uses for "exhibits" and 

"interpretation” are listed as two separate functions. 

Given the historic character to be achieved and 

maintained in the house, the finishes will be too 

sensitive to allow unsupervised access to the 

interior. Therefore, it is recommended that all 

visitor access should be under the direction of a 

Park interpreter or docent. 

The most effective approach to interpreting the 

Overseer’s House in accordance with the General 

Management Plan would be to restore the missing 

historic features that were in existence during the 

circa 1960 period of significance while retaining and 

preserving those that have survived from that 

period and before. The approach to presenting the 

circa 1960 physical character of the building 

requires the following treatments.

Site

There is little or no modification to the site 

necessary to fulfill the requirements of the General 

Management Plan if a fire suppression system is not 

provided in the house. The exceptions to this are 

the reconstruction of the stairs to the southwest 

gallery of the main building and southeast gallery of 

Room 111 and the construction of an ADA ramp to 

Door 2 on the northwest elevation of the house.

If a fire suppression system is provided to the house, 

there will need to be notable excavation on site to 

install the water line, valve boxes, etc. This may well 

precipitate the need for archaeological supervision 

of the effort. A cultural landscape plan should 

provide guidance for site treatments beyond the 

recommendations contained in this report. 

Foundations

A National Park Service contractor reconstructed 

the perimeter foundation piers and those beneath 

the gallery of the main building, as well as those 

beneath the wing additions. The piers on the main 

building and wing additions should be parged in 

accordance with the findings identified in Barbara 

Yocum’s 1996 Materials Analysis and the 

information revealed in the circa 1950s and 1996 

photographs provided by the National Park Service. 

This treatment will achieve an appearance 

consistent with that of circa 1960.

The spalling exhibited on some brick piers does not 

appear to be structurally significant. The missing 

brick from the fireplace foundations of the main 

building should be replaced with brick to match the 

historic brick in size, color, and composition, and 

using mortar matching the historic mortar 

composition. Based on details provided in the circa 

1950s photograph of the Overseer’s House, the 

lattice underpinning that once wrapped around the 

perimeter foundation piers should be replicated and 

installed.

Structure

A contractor for the National Park Service 

reconstructed portions of the gallery, roof, and wall 

framing of the main structure using members and 

joinery consistent with the historic materials and 

construction techniques. There are no known 

structural issues with the Overseer’s House, 

provided the management approach to use will not 

allow the floor loads to exceed what the historic 

structure can accommodate based on current 

Recommendations
90 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

codes. Additionally, as prescribed in the Design 

Analysis, all visitor access to the attic of the house 

should be prohibited.

Chimneys

The chimneys on the main building and wing 

additions are structurally sound. As recommended 

in the Design Analysis, chimney caps, designed in a 

manner that does not detract from the historic 

appearance of the chimneys, should be installed to 

prevent debris from falling into their openings. 

Roofing

In 1998, a contractor for the National Park Service 

installed new, galvanized, 5V- metal roofing on the 

main building to match in profile that which was 

known to exist circa 1960. The finish of the new 

roofing is dramatically different than the weathered 

roofing that was removed. While the finish of the 

new roofing produces a significant change to the 

historic characteristics, the type of roofing is similar 

to that which was used historically. Therefore, no 

modifications to this feature are recommended at 

this time. 

According to Barbara Yocum’s 1996 documentation 

of the existing framing for these dormers, it is 

understood the that this framing was removed 

during the stabilization treatments completed in 

1998. However, according to oral history, the 

dormers were removed sometime prior to 1959. 

Therefore, it is not recommended that they be 

reconstructed. The existing roofing on the two wing 

additions is weathered corrugated metal and is 

consistent with that which was on the wings in the 

circa 1950s photographs. The National Park Service 

has patched this roofing. It is recommended that 

this roofing be examined for holes and severe 

rusting to determine if it is impermeable to 

rainwater. It is also important to ensure that the 

flashing conditions around the chimneys secure the 

interior from moisture infiltration. If the roofing is 

deemed deteriorated, all new roofing materials 

should match those that existed historically in size, 

finish and profile. The existing, non- historic, ogee 

gutters and downspouts on the two wing additions 

should be removed, and half- round gutters like 

those that existed historically should be installed. 

The shed roof over Door 3 on the northeast 

elevation of the main building should be 

reconstructed. It is recommended elsewhere in this 

report that the existing clapboard siding be removed 

from this elevation and that Door 3 be expressed on 

the exterior in accordance with the circa 1960 

appearance of the northeast elevation of the house.

Gallery

The National Park Service has spliced new bottoms 

to select gallery columns where deterioration had 

occurred, and replaced deteriorated ceiling and 

flooring using materials that match the historic. 

Based on details provided in the circa 1950s 

photograph of the Overseer’s House, the gated 

gallery balustrade that once spanned the gallery 

columns should be reconstructed and installed 

based on historic profiles, dimensions, and 

assembly. Additionally, the brackets that existed at 

the top of the columns should be replicated using 

the information provided in the historic 

photographs included in this report and in the 

possession of the National Park Service. The gallery 

on the Room 111 addition should be restored to its 

circa 1960 appearance using materials that match the 

remaining historic fabric.

Doors

All of the doors in the house are historically 

important. Where the doors have been removed 

from their openings, they should be re- hung. It is 

recommended elsewhere in this report that the 

current, non- historic, interior and exterior wall 

finishes be removed on the northwest wall of Room 

102. During this process, it should be determined if 

Door 2 exists in this wall. It is known from 

photographs taken by the National Park Service in 

1996 that this door was in existence at that time and 

not covered by the historic asphalt siding. The 

restoration of this door also includes installing a 

screen door replicated to match what historically 

existed in this opening if the historic door no longer 

exists. Likewise, the historic stile- and- rail and 

screen doors and the multi- light transom should be 

restored to Door 4. If the historic doors and 

transom for this opening no longer exist, new doors 

should be constructed to match the historic. The 

scope of finishes on the doors circa 1960 should be 

confirmed using the detailed Materials Analysis and 

corresponding finish samples taken for the house. 

This information should be used as a reference 

when cleaning and preserving the doors and 

hardware in order to retain as close to the circa 1960 
National Park Service 91

condition and finish as is possible for accurate 

interpretation. 

Windows and Shutters

All the windows and shutters in the house are 

historic. Where the shutters have been removed 

from their openings, they should be re- hung and 

preserved. It has been recommended that the 

current interior and exterior wall finishes be 

removed on the northwest wall of Room 102. 

During this process, it should be determined if 

Window 3 exists in this wall. It is known from 

photographs taken by the National Park Service in 

1996 that this window was in existence at that time 

and not covered by the historic asphalt siding. The 

scope of finishes on the windows and shutters circa 

1960 should be confirmed using the detailed 

Materials Analysis and corresponding finish 

samples taken for the house. This information 

should be used as a reference when cleaning and 

preserving the windows and shutters in order to 

retain as close to the circa 1960 condition and finish 

as is possible for accurate interpretation. If the 

historic detailing of the window heads, jambs, and 

sills is substandard to the point of facilitating 

moisture infiltration and structural and interior 

damage, it should be supplemented. All treatment 

should be accomplished with minimal impact to 

protect the historic finishes and materials for future 

generations.

Exterior Wall Finishes

The non- historic clapboard siding that covers the 

exterior walls of the main building not protected by 

the gallery was installed by a contractor for the 

National Park Service. It is not representative of the 

exterior finish on these walls during the last years of 

the period of significance. Furthermore, this finish 

was installed in a manner that obscures two doors 

and one window, all of which are historic openings 

to the building that were expressed on the exterior 

circa 1960. A rolled, granulated asphalt siding was 

applied to the exterior walls of the main building 

and the two wing additions not protected by the 

galleries between 1959 and 1961. The asphalt siding 

has been removed from all exterior wall surfaces on 

the main building, but remains on the two wing 

additions.

While oral history dates the installation of the 

original asphalt siding on the exterior walls of the 

main building and wing additions to between 1959 

and 1961 (circa 1960), it is more reasonable to 

suggest that this siding was applied sometime in 

1959. As discussed earlier in this report, the George 

Lynn family occupied the Overseer’s House 

between 1959 and 1961. It was during that time that 

several material changes were made to the building, 

including installation of asphalt siding on the 

exterior walls. As many of the changes to the 

building were made in an attempt to update the 

house, it is reasonable to assume that they were 

implemented during the earlier rather than the later 

part of the Lynn family’s occupation of the house. 

However, as this argument is pure conjecture, it is 

also possible that the asphalt siding was not applied 

to the building’s exterior until 1961. In consideration 

of this possibility, and given what we know about 

the exterior siding from historic photographs and 

the Materials Analysis, the earlier clapboard siding 

could have still been intact in 1960 and, therefore, 

could be the appropriate exterior finish for the 

period of significance. Therefore, the existing 

clapboard finish would be consistent with the circa 

1960 historic character of the building. 

Nevertheless, its current configuration remains 

historically inaccurate in that it covers historically 

significant window and door openings. 

The ultimate treatment of the exterior siding 

consistent with the interpreted period of 

significance is challenging because exact dates of 

past treatments are unavailable. Therefore, 

decisions must be made based upon the known 

information. The documented oral history claims 

that, in addition to the application of exterior 

asphalt siding, the changes made to the Overseer’s 

House between 1959 and 1961 (circa 1960) included 

the installation of the existing pine flooring 

overlaying earlier flooring, the installation of the 

existing gypsum wallboard throughout the main 

building, the installation of the existing kitchen 

cabinetry in Room 105, and construction of the 

existing closet in Room 108. The decision to retain 

the existing clapboard siding as representative of 

the circa 1960 (but pre- 1959) appearance of the 

building’s exterior would logically require the 

removal of all the interior changes made to the 

building during the Lynn family’s tenancy. This 

treatment would be necessary to ensure that the 

building’s material features as they relate to each 

other remain consistent with one time frame and 
92 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR

that they accurately represent the historic character 

of the building at that time. In consideration of the 

changes that are known to have occurred during the 

last years of the designated period of significance, it 

is recommended that the clapboard siding be 

removed, re- layed flat, and covered with a nonpatterned, rolled, granulated asphalt siding of a 

color compatible with the historic asphalt siding 

background and texture. The use of a nonpatterned material of a similar color to the historic 

asphalt siding that remains on the wing additions 

will present a historically appropriate appearance to 

the house while affording the visitor the opportunity 

to differentiate between the historic and the 

replacement siding. This treatment is similar to that 

recommended for other structures in the Cane 

River Creole National Historical Park complex. 

Furthermore, it is recommended that the asphalt 

siding be applied so that it exposes Doors 2 and 3 

and Window 3 and that all other circa 1959- 1961 

changes to the building be retained and interpreted. 

Ceilings

The exposed ceiling joists and attic floorboards are 

historic and should be retained. The finishes on the 

ceilings in 1960 should be confirmed using the 

detailed Materials Analysis and corresponding 

finish samples taken for the house. This information 

should be used as a reference when cleaning and 

preserving the ceilings in order to retain their circa 

1960 condition and finish for accurate 

interpretation. The punkah fly fan mounted on the 

ceiling in Room 105 is a significant historic feature of 

the house, likely dating to its second period of 

occupation. This feature should be retained and 

preserved. The painted finishes on the punkah were 

selected to correspond to the finishes on the Room 

105 ceiling, and as with the ceilings, the finishes 

should be confirmed using the findings of the 

Materials Analysis.

Interior Walls

The interior finishes should be treated to match the 

finish condition of circa 1960. To do so will require 

further clarification of the findings presented in the 

original 1996 Materials Analysis and the 2002 

addendum to this report. However, according to 

oral history, the gypsum wallboard was installed 

between 1959 and 1961 when the Lynn family 

occupied the house. Therefore, this wall surface is 

appropriate to the period of significance and should 

be retained. The temporary polystyrene wallboard 

recently installed by the National Park Service in 

Room 102 should be removed and the historic finish 

appropriate to circa 1960 (likely gypsum wallboard 

painted the same as the balance of the walls at that 

time) should be restored. This should be confirmed 

by additional materials analysis. 

The interior wall finishes of Rooms 109, 110 and 111 

are not discussed in the 1996 Materials Analysis or 

its 2002 addendum. Therefore, the existing finishes 

should be considered historically appropriate to the 

circa 1960 period of significance, given that this was 

the last period of occupation for the house. 

The exposed bousillage wall in Room 103, above 

Door 10, should be left exposed, yet preserved and 

protected through managed care. This glimpse at 

the original wall construction is an interesting and 

informative interpretive tool.

Interior Flooring

According to oral history, the existing pine 

floorboards were installed between 1959 and 1961 

when the Lynn family occupied the house. 

Therefore, this flooring is appropriate to the period 

of significance and should be retained. The three 

layers of asphaltic flooring in Room 105 do not 

appear to date to the period of significance, as they 

were installed consecutively on top of the c.1959-

1961 floorboards, making them date to after the 

established period of significance. However, it is 

unclear in what year the Overseer’s House ceased to 

be occupied. Therefore, it is difficult to date the 

multiple layers of asphaltic- sheet flooring. In order 

to determine the most appropriate treatment for this 

flooring, more research is needed to confirm the 

date in which the 33⁄4" pine flooring was installed in 

Room 105 and throughout the entire house, as it 

seems to have been a uniform treatment. This 

information will be useful in establishing when the 

asphaltic- sheet flooring was installed and 

determining whether or not it is appropriate to the 

established circa 1960 period of significance. The 

three layers of asphalt flooring and the pine boards 

beneath have been exposed due to damage. If it is 

found that this later flooring is historically 

significant, its current condition could be retained 

to serve as a means to interpret the history of the 

varied flooring in that room. 
National Park Service 93

Fireplaces

The fireplaces should be restored to their circa 1960 

appearance and finish. This treatment would 

include retaining the gypsum wallboard on the 

existing exterior surfaces. Where the finishes have 

detached from the wood trim on the fireplaces, 

special attention should be given to ensure that they 

are restored to their circa 1960 appearance. The 

scope of finishes on the fireplace mantels and trim 

circa 1960 should be confirmed using the detailed 

Materials Analysis and corresponding finish 

samples taken for the house. 

Electrical Power and Lighting

Retain, repair, and re- wire, if possible, the existing 

historic light fixtures for interpretation. This 

approach should be accomplished in a manner that 

provides the historically appropriate amount and 

quality of light that was produced by the historic 

fixtures. New electrical service is required and must 

be in compliance with the latest edition of the 

National Electrical Code standards and 

requirements as well as local regulations. The 

electrical service must be sized to accommodate the 

loads required for the proposed use and should be 

concealed to support interpretation. The existing 

historic location for the service box is not sufficient 

dimensionally for the new panel board. The new 

panel board should be located out of public view to 

facilitate interpretation of the structure. Likewise, 

new wiring should be concealed in the 

interpretative rooms and fed from above for lights 

and below for any active junction boxes in historic 

locations. When considering location and method 

of installation, the routing of conduit and wiring 

should defer to the preservation of historic 

materials in all cases.

Gas Service

Retain all remaining features of the gas service that 

are evident in the main house. The use of gas fuel 

was typical of circa 1960 in rural Louisiana. Thus, it 

is highly likely that space heaters were supplied by a 

propane gas tank and piping accessing the interior 

of the house from the crawl space and through the 

remaining holes located in the floor throughout the 

house.

Handicapped Accessibility

Handicapped accessibility should be provided via a 

ramp to Door 2 on the northwest elevation of the 

main building or to the gallery on the opposite side 

of the house if necessary.
94 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR
National Park Service 95

Breedlove, Caroline. “Bermuda/Oakland Plantation, 

1830- 1880.” Unpublished masters thesis, 

Northwestern State University of Louisiana, 1999.

Cazayoux, Edward, AIA. “The Climatic Adaptation of 

French Colonial Architecture into the Louisiana 

Raised Cottage," at http://ecep1.usl.edu/ecep/

drafting/a/app- a.html.

Census Records of the United States, Fifth through Tenth 

and Twelfth through Fifteenth, 1850, 1860, 1870, 1880, 

1900, 1910, 1920, and 1930, Population Schedules, 

Natchitoches Parish, Louisiana, available online at 

http://www.ancestry.com.

Hertzog, Ambrose J. Letter to Charles Thornton of 

Continental- Eagle Corporation of Prattville, 

Alabama, 1989.

Hertzog, Betty. Oral interview with Deborah E. Harvey, 

Hartrampf, Inc. for this report, 2003.

Jones, Tommy. The Gin Barn, Magnolia Plantation, Cane 

River Creole National Historical Park, Historic 

Structure Report. Atlanta: National Park Service 

Southeast Regional Office, 2002.

Keel, Bennie C. with Christina E. Miller and Marc A. 

Tiemann. A Comprehensive Subsurface Investigation 

at Magnolia Plantation. Tallahassee: Southeast 

Archeological Center, 1999.

Malone, Ann Patton, Ph.D. “The Magnolia Plantation 

Overview." Unpublished MS, November 1996.

Miri, Ali A. Historic Structure Assessment Report – 

Blacksmith’s Shop, Magnolia Plantation. Atlanta: 

Southeast Regional Office, National Park Service, 

1997.

National Park Service. Cane River Creole National 

Historical Park General Management Plan/

Environmental Impact Statement, 2001.

National Park Service. Design Analysis – The Overseer’s 

House: Preserve and Stabilize Magnolia Plantation 

Structures, Denver: Denver Service Center, 2002.

Vincent, Doris Brett, e- mails to Deborah Harvey, 2003, 

regarding availability of utilities in the Cane River 

Area during the 1930s.

Vlach, John Michael. Back of the Big House: The 

Architecture of Plantation Slavery. Chapel Hill: The 

University of North Carolina Press, 1993.

Bibliography
96 Magnolia Overseer’s House HSR
As the nation’s principal conservation agency, the 

Department of the Interior has responsibility for most 

of our nationally owned public lands and natural 

resources. This includes fostering sound use of our 

land and water resources; protecting our fish, wildlife, 

and biological diversity; preserving the environmental 

and cultural values of our national parks and 

historical places; and providing for the enjoyment of 

life through outdoor recreation. The department 

assesses our energy and mineral resources and works 

to ensure that their development is in the best 

interests of all our people by encouraging stewardship 

and citizen participation in their care. The 

department also has a major responsibility for 

American Indian reservation communities and for 

people who live in island territories under U.S. 

administration. 

NPS D- 61 May 2004