Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1922-11-08
THE PALACE OF JUSTICE"
EXTRAVAGANCE IS STOPPED
Plans Must Be Revised IN the Interest Of
Economy and to Keep the Building
Within the Needs Of the Court

PnAu that tne law does NOT permit Judge
Brown, of the Municipal Court, to have his
way about the expenditure Of public money.
He has been able to get what he wants
in the way of appropriations for salaries
from the City Council by the use Of the
usual political methods. But when It comes
to the approval Of the plans for his Palace
OF Justice he Is compelled to 60 to the Court
OF Common Pleas for It. Under the old law
the County Commissioners may build no
new courthouses without the approval Of
the Judges Of this court.
But Judge Brown and the County Com.
missioners were going ahead with their plans
as though they had supreme authority.
They hired their architect and they got an
appropriation from City Council toward the
cost Of construction. Then some one who
knew what the law was stepped in and
summoned them before Judges Audenried,
McCullen and Finletter to explain what
they were doing.
The Judges demanded the facts in the
case: what was the extent Of the business
OF the Municipal Court, what amount Of
space 1t occupies at the present time and
what was needed and how much has been
what the proposed building was to cost.
Under their calm examination the plan
for the Palace of Justice appeared as pre-.
posterously extravagant to them as 1t did
to this newspaper when it was first made
public. They have summariy stopped the
whole project
Their disapproval Of the erection of one
wing of the proposed building is as EN-.
phatic as their disapproval of the erection
Of all Of It. This wing, standing by itself,
which would be large enough to accommo.
date about all of the present business of the
court. has been condemned as inartistic by
a member Of the Art Jury, the approval Of
which Is required before any public building
may be erected.
The condemnation of the plan seems to be
complete. 1t provides for too large build.
ing. Its cost Of 100000 is indefensible,
as It would involve waste of public money.
And such a part Of the structure as is
needed to accommodate the court would be
so inartistic as to challenge condemnation
by the jury created BY law to prevent the
erection of architectural monstrosities at
public expense,
This outcome justifes the fight that has
been made by public spirited citizens, backed
by this newspaper, upon the extravagant
ideas Of Judge Brown and upon his at.
tempts to exercise dictatorial powers in the
premises. Until Judge Audenried and his
associates called halt he had had every.
thing his own way. He decided what kind
of a courthouse he wanted. He got his
plans approved by the County Commits.
sioners, who. under the anomalous law.
were supposed to have power to build 1t.
And he got the appropriation from the City
Corncil without giving any definite informa.
ton about the total amount that he wished.
Now 1t IL up to the Mayor. the City
Solicitor and the County Commissioners to
consider what the rejection Of the plans
means.
Does 1t mean that the whole enterprise
must be started again? Or does it merely
mean that John T. Windrim. the architect
who prepared the original plans. must
modify them to meet the objections Of the
Common Pleas Judges:
The taxpayers suit brought last year to
oust the County Commissioners from con.
troll of the work under the provisions Of the
Charter which puts the erection Of all pub.
lie buildings to be paid for by an appro.
priation of Council under the supervision
of the City Architect was dismissed for it
was shown that the contract with Mr.. Win
drim was made before the adoption of the
Charter and that an exception was made Of
such cases.
II the dsapproval Of the plans involves
the making Of a new contract with Mr..
wndrim. It would seem as II the Charter
provisions would run and that the County
Commissioners would have to withdraw.
But the probabilities are that way Will bs
found to make the contract a continuing
ono so that the work can be done 40 It was
MANNED to be done in the first place BY Judge
Brown.
In any event, the wasteful expenditure OF
money has been stopped. If 1t shall ap.
near that the Windrim contract 10 a con.
t,nu,ng one the court, which already has
shown a proper sense Of its responsibilities
will see to It that only q reasonable sum II
spent on the bui'ding.