The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1905-08-06

nearly perfect as the situation and the
money appropriated admitted of, and that
in the same respects the Smith plan in
the most important particulars was vastly
inferior to the Lockwood plan, and that
In one particular of the greatest practical
Importance 1t was the most defective in
the lot.
Justifes the Judges.
Having fully justified the position of the
Judges from the utlitarian point OF view
in respect of the interior of the building
| now propose to as fully justify them
from the artistic point of view IN re-
spect of the exterior of the building. l
will show, not by my own opinion, which
is valueless on the subject, but by the
reasons which underlie my conclusions,
by great architectural examples, and
by the unbiased opinions of the most COM
petent architects, some of them at the
very top of the profession that the plan
adopted by the judges is in Its general
features and particular treatment OF the
existing status not only the best plan
submitted but the only plan that Will
meet at once the artistic and sentimental
ends in view.
1t is to be borne In mind that the new
wings were not proposed for the purpose
of identifying the old capitol, but only
because the states business required more
room. There is general fsatisfaction with
the present building upon every considera-
ton of art and architecture. 1t is at once
simple and imposing, symmetrical and
pleasing to the professional as well as to
, the untutored eye in it's lines and pro-
portions. There is no occasion from an ar
tistic point of view either to change its
own structure or to change its aspect
by adjacent structures. Moreover, potent
considerations of q Just sentiment OPP
pose any change. 1t is the universal desire
that the old capitol shall stand as far
as possible In its own integrity and in
dividuality as a monument to the glorious
and sacred memories That cluster about
1t, and that any additions which the
necessities of the state require to be
made should affect it as an architectural
entity to the least possible extent and
leave It still to dominate and give charac-
ter to the whole. 1t was to conserve this
universal desire of the people in which
fully shared that have all along favored
an entirely separate building for the SUI
preme court; that surely could not detract
from or in any respect change the old
building | understand the executive Of
ficers to share this same desire, and
that they sought to attain 1t by setting
down in the programme of this COMPETE
ton the language quoted hereinbefore to
the effect that the proposed wings should
be of such dimensions and proportions
and so Joined on not to change the
architectural qualitr of the old building,
nor to necessitate any change in its struc-
ture Except possibly by enlarging Its
DOME"
to prove that to give architectural domi-
nance and Individuality to the middle one
of three conjoined buildings Ii is nee
essary to give greater height to the
middle building than the others. Mere ex-
ceeding width would not accomplish the
purpose. The fact that the center struc-
ture supports dome would not because
the dome Is in aspect apportioned to the
whole mass, and 1t was for the purpose
of properly apportioning the dome in this
instance to the longer mass proposed that
the programme provided for Its enlarge
ment The dominance of the old capitol
desired Is, Of course, dominance In the
architectural sense, dominance In perspec-
tive. dominance to the eye, the command
ing aspect of the old structure over the
new one upon either hand. If each of
the three structures are of the same
height, the whole becomes an inarticu-
ulate mass, one architectural entity with
no dominant feature and no Individuality
in any feature. OF course, perfectly sat-
isfactory edifice abstractly speaking
might be reared with the present capitol
as part oil IL Dy dddltlOnB AT the same
elevation and by increasing the elevation
of the whole to correspond with the in
creased length of the whole: but such
treatment would absolutely destroy the
present building and merge every ves-
tige of its individuality into the new
mass. Nor would the slight separation
of the socalled wings by connecting cor
ridors avoid such a result
1t is rare. indeed, ! take II, that such
propositions as are advanced next above
can be proved. They usually rest upon
speculation and opinion Fortunately. in
this instance they can be established be-
yond doubt by the best evidence OF thous-
ands of eye witnesses, the evidence of ev-
cry man who has looked upon the ma
tioEal capitol or upon pictures Of It,
Washington Capitol.
The original capitol at Washington,
though much larger, was strikingly like
the capitol OF Alabama, INTELLECTUALLY
speaking The government needed more
room. 1t was concluded to add wings to
the edifice. | am not advised that there
was any desire TO maintain the individ-
uality and architectural identity of the
old building. Its history was in some re-
spects ignominious rather than glorious.
There was no Just sentiment which de-
manded that its architectural entity
should be maintained and perpetuated, as
there is just ana UNIVERSAL sentiment
which demands that the architectural en-
tity of our capitol should be maintained
and perpetuated SO the wings were adj
ded Of the same height of the original
building and they were Joined on by
colonnades or corridors precisely as 1t Ii
proposed to join on the wings here.
The wings were added to the capitol at
Washington, in other words in precisely
the same way and they were precisely
the same sort Of wings In respect of
elevation, that are proposed by the three