The Montgomery advertiser., 1905-08-08


 tude to an arrangement of a carpenters premises, if such a thing can be imag- ined, whereby his shop would be on the first floor and his tools of constant nec- essary use would be kept constantly on the second floor to which he would have to ascend by an outside stair for each separate implement as he would have occasion to use 1t. Moreover, this plan locates the library on the second floor. This Is the only apartment in the build ing of direct public use. All others are used by the public indirectly through the judges, officers and bar of the court. But the people in their own proper per- sons use and are entitled to use conve- niently the books of the library, and have occasion especially to use its val uable collection of miscellaneous books. Upon every consideration this room should be on the first floor, accessible to the public. Instead, 1t is located as of the public. Mr., Smiths arrange ment in this respect is analogous to the arrangements of a dwelling house whereby the reception hall would be converted into a bed room, and the sit- ting room would be on the second floor. Another serious defect in the Smith plan is that 1t puts the judges work sible from the court room, and as in- convenient as possible for the work of the judges.
 Enough has been said. think. to de- monstrate that MT. Lockwood's pro- posed interior construction and ar- rangement was not only the best sub mitted. but was practically perfect. cer- tainly as nearly perfect as the situa- ton and the money appropriated ad- mitted Of, and that in the same respects the Smith plan in the most important particulars was vastly inferior to the <,lrx A@1 IL &lNA t,z IL ular of the greatest practical import ance 1t was the most defective in the lot.
 Justifies the Judges.
 Having fully justified the position of the judges from the utilitarian point of view, in respect of the interior of the building. I now propose to as fully jus tify them from the artistic point of view in respect of the exterior of the building. I will show. not by my own opinion, which Is valueless on the sub ject but by the reasons which underlie my conclusions, by great architectural examples, and by the unbiased opinions of the most competent architects, some of them at the very top of the profess sion, that the plan adopted by the judges Is in it's general features and particular status not only the best plan submitted. but the only plan that will meet at once the artistic and senti- mental ends in view.
 It is to be borne in mind that the new wings were not proposed for the pur- pose of beautifying the old Capitol. but only because the States business re- Quired more room. There Is general satisfaction with the present building upon every consideration of art and ar- chitecture It is at once simple and imposing. symmetrical and pleasing to the professional as well as to the un- tutored eye in it's lines and proportions There is no occasion from an artistic point of view either to change its own structure or to change It's aspect by ad- jacent structures. Moreover, potent considerations of just sentiment op- pose any change It Is the universal desire that the old Capitol shall stand as far as possible in its own integrity and individually as a monument to the glorious and sacred memories that cluss ter about 1t, and that any additions which the necessities of the State re- quire to be made should affect it as an architectural entity to the least pos sible extent and leave 1t still to domi- nate and give character to the whole. It was to conserve this universal de- sire of the people in which l fully. shared that I have all along favored an entirely separate building for the Supreme Court: that surely could not detract from or in any respect change the old building. l understand the ex- ecutive officers to share in this same desire. and that they sought to attain 1t by setting down in the program of this competition the language quoted hereinbefore to the effect that the pro- posed wings should be ofSsnch dimen- sions and proportions and so joined on as not to change the architectural quail ity of the old building. nor to necessi- tate any change in its structure, "ex- cept' possibly by enlarging its dome"
 tn m ment to prove that to give architec- tural dominance and individuality to the middle one of three conjoined buildings 1t is necessary to give great CT height to the middle building than the others. Mere exceeding width would not accomplish the purpose. The fact that the center structure supports Is in aspect apportioned to the whole mass, and it was for the purpose of properly apportioning the dome In this. instance to the longer mass proposed that the program provided for Its en- largement. The dominance of the old capitol desired Is, of course. dominance in perspective, dominance to the eye. the commanding aspect of the old structure over the new one upon eith- CT hand If each of the three struc- lures are of the same height, the whole becomes an inarticulate mass. one ar chitectural entity with no dominant fea- ture and no individuality in any fea- ture Of course, a perfectly satisfac-. tory edifice abstractly speaking might be reared with the present capitol as part of 1t by additions at the same elevation and by increasing the eleva- tion of the whole to correspond with the increased length of the whole; but such treatment would absolutely de- stroy the present building and merge 1P Id the new mass. Nor would the slight separation of the so-called wings by (Continued on Page 9)