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

ment, and the inherent nature of the
duty imposed by the statute, the award
ing of the palm of merit in an architec-
tural competition, is essentially judicial
rather than executive.
Judgment Shown.
l have said that the wisdom OF the
legisla ture the third equal and co-ordi-
nate department of the state government,
in giving the judges a voice in this mat
ter is obvious. / now say that this leg
islative prescience has been fully demon
strated by the result. But for the pres
ence Of the judges on this commission
there would have been inflicted upon the
supreme court. upon the bar and upon
the people of Alabama a building for
the transaction of the most important
judicial business of the people-the final
arbitrament of their estates, liberties and
liyes-unadapted to the uses intended,
and which as long as it should stand,
probably for a century, would impede and
delay and obstruct the great work of
the bar and the court. Not only so, but
the building favored by our executive con-
freres would have destroyed the archi-
tectural entity of the present capitol
which the people are justly anxious to
maintain as well for its beauty and SYM
metry as for the sacred memories which
cluster about it, and left in its stead
mass of buildings wanting in correctness
of architectural lines and devoid of
architectural beauty.
The first of these propositions-that the
building which the judges prevented be-
ing erected would have been radically
unadapted for its proposed uses--I will
undertake to demonstrate absolutely. The
second propostion-that that building
would have subserved instead of meeting
the architectural ends universally de-
sired-I shall undertake to demonstrate,
in so far as such an abstruse proposition
can be demonstrated, by reason, by pre-
cedent, and by high professional opinion.
Legislative Contemplation.
1t was not, l take it, in the contem-
plation of the legislature that either
the executive officers or the judges, indi-
vidualy or collectively, had any special
knowledge of, or talent or genius for
architecture. If the lawmakers had any
such notion, they were mistaken. But
suppose it may be said, as a sort of gener-
alization, that all sensible men of polite
education and some travel and observa-
ton have some general knowledge to dis
Germ and distinguish, to some extent, that
which is excellent and pleasing from an
architectural point of view in the lines
and proportions of prominent or pretensi-
Gus edifces, and, in less degree but still
to an extent the capacity to form judg-
ment of some value from the drawings of
proposed buildings. This general knowl-
edge and capacity of the judges of the
supreme court, insist, possessed equally,
man for man, with our friends of the
executive department on the commission,
and as there were seven of us to five OF
them 1t wouu seem to follow that the
Judges collectively knew more about this
matter from the artistic point of view
than they knew. In the matter of utility
of the proposed building, there was not
one of the judges but who knew more
than any one of our executive conductors.
We claim no advantage of them on ac-
count of the judicial habit and temper
ament which are incident to our profess
sion and duies, and which are not sup
posed to pertain, in like degree at least,
to their positions. We accord them that
entire purity and disinIerestedness of mo-
tive which none but e libeller will deny
to us. Such in personnel and character