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

are on the ground floor, and thus open
to the use of the public without disturb
ance of the individual and consultation
work of the judges. The judges rooms are
on the second floor, where they are easily
accessible to lawyers and others having
occasion to see them, but free from cas-
ual and unnecessary interruptions by the
public. There, too, are the office of the
clerk and the private secretary In con-
venient relation to the consultation room
and the judges rooms and as conven-
lent as practicable to lawyers who only
beside the judges have official business
with them. Every lawyer will know that
all this is as 1t should be and as 1t al
ways has been. and that to have it other
wise would be a positive and material
detriment and obstruction to the business
of the court and the use of the library
accentuated by the fact that any change
in these matters would do violence to i'm
memorial usage and habit. / need not go
into further description. l will, however
add that in all the discussion of this mat
ter whether in the commission or out
of it, l have never heard anybody DENY
that the plan of Mr.. Lockwood in respect
of adaptation to the uses for which this
building Is to be erected, is the best that
was submitted
Plan of Mr.. Smith.
On the other hand, l need refer par
tlcularly only to the plan of Mr.. Smith,
which has been mace The basis of attack
on the judges, which the friends of Mr.
Smith seek through public clamor raised
upon Misrepresentation and misconcep-
ton, to impose on the state, the decision
OF the commission to the contrary not
outstanding, and which the executive
officers favored. Mr.. Smith in his plan
and drawings deliberately violated three
important rules adopted by the executive
for Ao
violations had relation to the exterior
and one to the interior of the building.
The latter only need be considered at
this point of the discussion. AS we have
seen, the programme of competition re-
quired the competing architects to locate
the library and court room on the same
floor. Smith located them on different
floors. And he put tie library, the room
most used by the pubic, on the second
floor, out of the way of the public. He
sought to excuse this before the COM
mission by claiming that these apart
ments could not be placed on the same
floor in a three-story building. / suppose
his dereliction was excused by the execu-
tive officers on that ground. II the fact
supported his claim 1t would also UNI
aswerably support the ultiitarian neces-
sity for two-story building; and If Mr..
Smiths professional conscience would not
admit of the two-story treatment-if he
could not engage in the competition on
the fundamental rules prescribed for it,
he should not have presented any plan.
Blu the supposed fact was four times
disproved by the submissions of other
architects. Four other architects SUBJ
mitted three-story plans. 1t has been
stated in the Montgomery Advertiser that
each of these four plans located the court
room and the library on different floors.
This is a fair Illustration of that paper
ignorance of the premises and not the
greatest of the numerous misstatements
1t has made. The fact is that each of
these four three-story plans placed the
court room and the library on the same
moor. Smith was the only competitor to
violate this important rule of the competi-
ton. He alone of the five architects
who submitted three-story plans did not
apparently know how to comply with this
plain mandate of the commission, for we
assume that only limitations of architec-
tural capacity drove him to its violation.
AS we have said, and for the reasons
to which we have adverted among others,
every lawyers will at once recognize that
this placing of the library ON different
floor and away from the court, the means
of access even being outside of and away
from the court ROOM would be such de-
fective and disadvantageous arrangement,
so obstructive and hindering to the work
of the court and of the bar as is not to
be tolerated If it can DE avoided; and
six out of the seven plans submitted do
avoid 1t. The scheme is of such obvious
and yet peculiar viciousness as not to re-
quire and scarcely to admit Of illustrative
analogy 1t bears O. similtude to an ar
rangement of a carpenters premises, IL
such a thing can be imagined, whereby
his shop would be on the first floor and
his tools of constant necessary use would
be kept constantly on the. second floor to
which he would have to ascend by an out
side stair for each separate implement as
he would have occasion to use it, More
over, this plan locates the library ON the
second floor. This is the only apartment in
the building of direct public use. All 9TH
ers are used by the public indirectly
through the judges, officers and bar of the
court. But the people In their own proper
persons use and are entitled to use con-
veniently the books of the library, and
have occasion especially to use Its valu-
able collection of miscellaneous books.
Upon every consideration this room should
be on the first floor, accessible to the
nlhlic Instead. 1t is located as incon-
veniently as possible for the use of the
public. Mr.. Smiths arrangement In this
respect is analogous to the arrangement
of a dwelling house whereby the recep-
ton hall would be converted into BED
room, and the sitting room would pc on
the second floor. Another serious defect
in the Smith plan is that II puts me
judges work rooms on the tniro noor, ss
far as possible from the court room, ana
as inconvenient as possible for the work
of the judges.
Enough has been said, l think, to
demonstrate that Mr.. Lockwood pro-
posed interior construction and arrange
Inent was not only the best submitted
but was practically perfect, certainly as