USA > Pennsylvania > Washington County > The courts of justice, bench & bar of Washington County, Pennsylvania > Part 9
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27
present building, which the plans at the time of building pro- vided for if needed in the future. We all thought when we built that we had made ample provision for future needs, and now, only ten years from its completion, all our space is used up. Within five years at the farthest we must enlarge. Al- ready our sheriff's office, and prothonotary's too, have over- flowed, and we are now storing papers and record books in the cellar.
"Our old jail contained cell room for sixty prisoners; in our new jail we provided cell room for three hundred and ten, and we are now crowded for room. By recalling the grand jury and working off the jail cases we manage to get along.
"Say to the commissioners of Washington County, don't build too small; you can hardly build too large - within rea- son, of course; there is reason in all things. Your county has been growing rapidly of late years, and if you build only a little beyond your present needs, you will make a great mistake. If you build three or four times your present needs, you will find yourselves crowded long before you expect it, if your rate of increase continues like it has been and promises to be. Don't make the mistake of building too small; make it in the other direction, if at all; and the chances all are that it will turn out not to be a mistake at all."
N. S. Williams, Esq., attorney for the county commis- sioners, was present and heard all of Mr. Mercer's statements, and corroborated fully all his statements, adding, "We are cramped for room all around."
Mr. Ruch, deputy recorder, who was connected with the recorder's office in the old building, and has been in the office continuously since, said: " We are full up. You can't build too large a court-house. We have got to have another room here. Our present office was supposed to be large enough to last for forty or fifty years. We need a gallery now around this room, and it is not fifteen years since it was built. We have to have another room. Washington County will make a grand mistake if they don't have lots of room, especially in the recorder's office and the prothonotary's office. All the
JOHN I. CARSON, PROTHONOTARY. 1900-1902.
CHARLES E. BAKER, CLERK OF COURTS, 1900-1902.
[Half-tones by Bragdon, from photographs by Hallam.]
•
103
CIRCULAR AND REMONSTRANCE.
space we have left for mortgage indices is three racks holding fourteen books each, and less than two years will fill that up. We have in this office now almost one thousand mortgage books and almost one thousand deed books. Make it emphatic - whatever you do, build large enough."
A. J. McQuitty, prothonotary: "Our space was calculated to last for twenty-five to fifty years, and it's now only about ten years and it is full now. We haven't got room. If we get another court here, which we will have to have soon, as business is behind a year, we can't get along at all. We have to put papers in the cellar already. We have papers in the cellar already, and old books piled up there. We haven't got near room enough. Those file boxes run up to the floor of the gallery, then begin on the gallery and run clear to the ceiling, and in use clear up. It won't be five years, not more than that, until we have to build on the lot across the way. The clerk's office and the treasurer's office and the commissioner's office are all insufficient. We had to move our cashier back into this corner, and put in a cash-carrier system in order to make room. The sheriff has to use a large room upstairs in connection with his office, or he couldn't get along at all."
The above so fully represents the universal opinion of other officers, attorneys, and persons familiar with the court- house and the work and business there, that it is useless to reiterate their statements. All talked in the same line, some quite decidedly, others less so. The recorder and prothono- tary were very emphatic, in fact seemed somewhat exasperated. There was not a single assertion by any one that the accommo- dations were sufficient, and on the other hand not a single dissent to the statement that the present accommodations were inadequate, especially in view of the near future.
CIRCULAR AND REMONSTRANCE.
- Attached to and made a part of said statement and peti- tion was also a copy of a printed circular that had been sent out through the county, as follows:
104
COURTS OF JUSTICE, BENCH, AND BAR.
TO THE CITIZENS OF WASHINGTON COUNTY:
The Commissioners of Washington County have selected a plan and have published the contract with the architect for the erectiou of the new court-house, providing for an expen- diture of $500,000 to begin with. The average tax-payer can- not but regard this sum, compared with the county valuation, as grossly extravagant; realizing that it is only an estimate in the inception of the plan, and that such plans are invariably delusive, representing only the possible minimum expendi- tures; the common experience being an increase of fifty per cent on the estimates when buildings are completed.
Admitting the necessity for a new court-house, and that we are fully committed to its erection, we submit a comparison with the amounts expended and to be expended in adjacent counties.
Allegheny County, with a valuation in 1896 of $482,091,- 570, expended about $2,500,000; Westmoreland, with a valua- tion now of $55,464,909, proposes to spend $190,000 if granite is selected, and $150,000 if sandstone; thus Washington County, with a valuation of about $40,000,000, proposes to spend proportionately nearly three times as much as Allegheny County and four times as much as Westmoreland County.
The new court-house at Butler cost $150,000; the new court-house and jail at Uniontown -the cost of which created such widespread dissatisfaction in Fayette County - cost $228,000, and jail $106,000, contract price.
Be it remembered that our farmers and miners, manu- facturers and all our business interests, have for the last five years endured a period of severe depression. Farmers have particularly suffered, and are now in a condition that makes additional taxation a peculiar hardship. They are the least benefited by a luxurious, costly edifice, which will exceed in cost the capitols of many great states, and will equal the amount it is contemplated to spend for the new capitol at Harrisburg, which is fixed at $550,000.
It is now apparent that the Flinn road law was defeated to make room for this extravagance. Let the intelligent
105
CIRCULAR AND REMONSTRANCE.
tax-payer measure the benefit of a good-road system in Wash- ington County, compared with the advantages of an ornate and luxurious court-house and a palatial jail.
The farmer, who is now in depths of mud and misery, whose fondest dream is to keep away from a court-house of any kind, is asked-is compelled -to forego for years all possibility of improvements in roads, and to provide the Washington bar, and the politicians who occupy the county offices, with quarters imposing, magnificent, and worthy of royal estate. How much better for the development of the county would it be to reduce the estimate $250,000, and de- vote that amount to the beginning of a road system; say a good highway from McDonald to Washington; from Canons- burg to Washington; from Monongahela to Finleyville; Char- leroi to Monongahela and Bentleysville. Can there be any question as to comparative benefits to the county at large?
It is known that Allegheny County has commenced a system of road improvement that will soon enhance the value of Alle- gheny County farm land, and in point of desirability Wash- ington County land will be contrasted unfavorably.
An act is on the statute books authorizing Washington County, or any two adjoining counties, to establishi a work- house, Fayette and Westmoreland counties joining with this object in view. The propriety and economy of such a step in Washington County is evident; but the excessive taxa- tion contemplated for the new court-house will postpone the day of its attempt for many years.
As tax-payers we protest against the expenditure of $500,000 as oppressive and unwarrantable.
We protest against increasing valuations for the flimsy pretext of keeping down the millage.
We protest against burdening the county with debt that will endure during the lives of the majority of tax-payers.
A vigorous expression of public opinion in the way of let- ters of remonstrance may be the means of enforcing proper economy and a reduction of the amount now proposed to ex- pend.
[SIGNED BY 17 PERSONS. ]
106
COURTS OF JUSTICE, BENCH, AND BAR.
- The foregoing circular letter, so signed, was transmitted to the county commissioners with a signed petition submitting the same to their consideration, and earnestly protesting, as citizens and tax-payers, "against the expenditure of more than $250,000 in the erection of the new court-house." This peti- tion was signed by three hundred and seventy-two persons.
On the submission of the foregoing statement and petition of the county commissioners, with the accompanying exhibits, the court afforded an opportunity for suggestions by any one who wished to be heard. Thereupon Mr. R. C. McConnell, of the bar, stating that he had not been employed professionally, and did not so appear for any person or persons, submitted to the court the following motion:
1. To withhold approval of the plans submitted by F. J. Osterling, architect, until it is definitely known what the max- imum cost of the building under these plans will be.
2. To appoint a committee of three or more members of the bar, with power to subpoena witnesses and take testimony, for the purpose of determining the maximum cost of the build- ing under the plans submitted.
3. To defer further action in the matter of the approval of the plans submitted until the question of securing title to the lot belonging to the estate of James W. Kuntz, deceased, in the rear of the present county property, by the county, has been finally settled and determined.
- Remarks were then made by the following members of the bar: Mr. James I. Brownson, Mr. John H. Murdoch, Mr. T. Jefferson Duncan, Mr. M. L. A. McCracken, Mr. A. M. Linn, Mr. A. S. Sprowls, Mr. J. P. Miller, Mr. W. S. Parker, Mr. T. F. Birch, and Mr. McConnell, but one gentleman ob- jecting to the approval of the plans and specifications pre- sented.
At the afternoon adjournment, the court overruled the fore- going motion, indorsing thereon the following order: "And now, April 11, 1898, the within motion, made in open court,
WILLIAM C. ROBISON, REGISTER, ETC., 1900-1902.
W. FRANK PENN, RECORDER, 1898-1903.
[Half-tones by Bragdon, from photographs by Hallam.]
107
OPINION AND DECREE.
is overruled, for the reason that a committee of the bar, already appointed, have recommended the approval of the plans, and that an estimated cost of the buildings has already been made," and filed the following
OPINION AND DECREE:
An Act of Assembly approved April 19, 1895, provides as follows: "Whenever the commissioners of any county are authorized and required to erect a court-house, jail, or other county building, they shall submit the plans and specifications adopted by them to the judges of the Court of Common Pleas of the proper county, for their approval," etc.
In compliance with the requirements of this act, the plans and specifications of the new court-house and jail, which the county commissioners propose to erect, have been submitted for our examination and approval. In arriving at what it is our duty to do in the premises, we have considered the matter from three points of view:
1. The adequacy in size of the buildings it is proposed to erect;
2. Their convenience of arrangement; and
3. The cost.
1. In considering the question of the adequacy of size, we must not lose sight of the fact that these buildings ought to last at least as long as the old court-house lasted, which was nearly sixty years. Taking the continued increase in the population and wealth of our county, and the increase in the business done in the various offices and in the courts during the last sixty years, as a guide, we cannot see how the rooms and space that are provided for in the plans sub- mitted, for the courts, for juries, for the witnesses, for the
108
COURTS OF JUSTICE, BENCH, AND BAR.
attorneys, for the various county officers, for the public records and files, and for the public who have business with these offi- cers and in the courts, could be curtailed.
Anticipating our wants in the very near future, neither the proposed court-house nor the jail is larger, in our opinion, than is needed to meet the requirements of the law, which pro- vides for the erection of " proper and necessary buildings for the accommodation of the courts and the several officers of the county, and for the reception and safe-keeping of the records and other papers in charge of said officers," and the confine- ment of prisoners. We therefore approve of the size of the building.
2. An examination of the plans of the court-house shows that the convenience and comfort of the courts and officers and those having business to transact, and the facilities for the orderly transaction of business, have been carefully studied and provided for, and that as good an arrangement of court and jury rooms and public offices has been made as it is pos- sible to make; and the same may be said of the jail. Good ventilation, sufficient heating, and proper sanitary arrange- ments, so far as we are able to judge, have been carefully and fully provided for in both buildings, and we see nothing in the internal arrangement of either that we cannot approve.
3. The cost to the tax-payers should be no more than is necessary to substantially build what we need. But the wants of the people should not be slighted because of the cost. If the size of the buildings contemplated are no larger than are needed, and their internal arrangements, equipments, and fin- ish are no more than will make first-class public buildings, then no reasonable person will object to paying what it will
109
OPINION AND DECREE.
cost to erect such buildings, economically built. So far as we have been able to learn, the tax-payers of Washington County, at least a large majority of them, desire the commissioners to erect a first-class court-house and jail, and that the buildings be such in size and equipment as to fully meet the needs of the county for years to come.
Washington County, in mineral wealth, in industrial devel- opment, in agricultural advancement, and in intellectual cul- ture, stands among the counties of the state in the front rank, and she should have public buildings in keeping with her standing; and we believe her people, intelligent and progressive as they are, will be satisfied with nothing less. They want no extravagance, no unnecessary expenditure of money, but in our opinion they do want fine public buildings, and will cheer- fully pay whatever it may cost to economically construct such buildings. And it may not be out of place to here quote from a communication received by one of us touching the plans sub- mitted by the commissioners and on exhibition during the past week. The writer says:
"The principle that 'we should get the best' applies with especial force to the building of a new court-house. This is an event that comes only once in two or three generations, and its far-reaching importance should be realized. The build- ing we are now about to construct ought to stand for seventy- five or one hundred years, and we are thus building the future of the county into its walls. Any mistake that we make in its construction will perpetuate itself and plague the county for a long time to come. If it is too small, or ill planned, or faultily constructed, if its materials are cheap and its appearance mean, if it is unworthy of its place as the civic center of the county, the mistake cannot be corrected, and our short-sight- edness will have fastened a burden on the county for the next
110
COURTS OF JUSTICE, BENCH, AND BAR.
century. The construction of such a building is thus a high and solemn responsibility, and our thought should be, not how cheaply can we discharge it, but how nobly can we fulfill it.
"The building should be adapted in its arrangements and ample in its accommodations, not only for the present, but also for distant future needs. This county, with its fertile soil and rich mineral deposits, its growing population and intelli- gence and wealth, and its developing manufactures and prox- imity to great cities and markets, has a great future. This growth will be attended with multiplying legal business and an ever-increasing pressure upon the courts of justice. A building that will be ample for to-day will be crowded and cramped and wholly inadequate for to-morrow. We must build for the future, and this puts a severe but necessary strain upon the present.
" A good building constructed on the best plans, with the latest improvements and most efficient appliances, and with the best materials and workmanship, though its first cost is higher, yet in the long run it is the most economical. Cheap things are often the dearest. Cheapness is poor compensation for inferiority. A cheap building, above all things else, soon calls for repair, and this call finally becomes chronic and insatiable. It will be more economical and satisfactory to the tax-payers of the county to construct a building so planned and built that it will be substantial and lasting, and not be a burden of expense.
"The court-house of a county should be something more than a mere house in which business can be transacted; a very cheap building or a rented hall might serve this purpose. The court-house is the temple of justice that should be the incarnation of the civic life of the county. It stands in the
W. SCOTT ARMSTRONG, COUNTY TREASURER, 1900-1902.
H. EDGAR MCCUTCHEON, SUPERINTENDENT OF BUILDINGS FROM 1900.
[Half-tones by Bragdon, from photographs by Hallam.]
111
OPINION AND DECREE.
center of the county as its stone core, towards which all civil interests converge, and from which all the lines of justice radi- ate. It is the central hub of the county, binding all its inter- ests into unity, around which all points on the whole circum- ference of the county revolve. It is the mighty heart of the county, where its civic life beats pure and strong, and whence it flows out through all its people. This temple should be no cheap and mean and temporary building, but it should be a structure that will be worthy of our county, and that will fitly represent and embody the strength and solidity and nobility of its citizenship. It should be suggestive, not of early pio- neer days when our fathers dwelt in tents, but of settled and developed civilization. It should represent, not penury and penuriousness, but our wealth and liberality. Above all, it should be a fitting incarnation of the spirit of justice, standing before us dignified and majestic, suggesting thoughts and feelings of reverence and awe, a veritable sermon in stone. Such a noble and grand symbol of law and order will ever silently preach justice, and make its mystic presence and power felt throughout all our bounds. Every one that looks upon its massive pile or stands within its precincts will feel its meaning and majesty. Under its protecting shadow all men will stand equal. It will worthily represent and express our rank and standing among the counties of the state. It will belong to no one town or class of citizens in the county, but will embody the civic life of all our citizens, and will be every man's pos- session and every man's just pride.
" The difference in cost between such a building and one of cheaper grade might be $200,000 or more, but this differ- ence in the end will be the highest economy. I do not favor extravagance, but the closest economy, in the expenditure of public funds, and I believe this economy will be realized only
112
COURTS OF JUSTICE, BENCH, AND BAR.
in such a building as has been planned for by the county commissioners."
The estimated cost of the buildings as given by the com- missioners in their petition this day filed, we think not unrea- sonable. And if this amount, economically expended, is necessary to erect the buildings which it is proposed to build, its expenditure will meet our approval.
And now, April 11, 1898, after hearing and upon due con- sideration, the plans and specifications prepared by F. J. Osterling, architect, for a new court-house and jail, and sub- mitted to us by the county commissioners, are approved, and the said commissioners are authorized to take bids for the erection of the same in accordance with said plans and speci- fications, as provided in the Act of Assembly approved April 19, 1895, P. L. 38.
J. A. MCILVAINE, President Judge.
J. F. TAYLOR, Additional Law Judge.
-The statistics set out in the statement and petition of the county commissioners, upon which the foregoing opin- ion and decree of the court were based, notes the changes in the business conditions of the county, especially since the year 1880; but only as indicated by the increased num- ber of volumes in the public offices containing the records of the public business. That inferences may be made as to the progress of the county external to the court-house and its various offices, some additional facts may be regarded as proper, to indicate its development since 1840, when our third court-house was well under way, the territorial limits of the county since then remaining the same.
By the census of 1840, the population of the borough
FRANK R. HALL,
COUNTY SUPERINTENDENT OF COMMON SCHOOLS, 1896-1902. [Half-tone by Bragdon, from photograph by Hallam.]
113
DEVELOPMENT SINCE 1840.
of Washington was 2,062, while the population of the whole county was 41,279. But by the census of 1900 the popula- tions were: Borough of Washington, 7,670; borough of East Washington, 1,051; borough of West Washington, 2,693; borough of North Washington, 1,473; and borough of South Washington, 1,230. Total of the five boroughs, 14,117; while the population of the whole county was 92,181.
In 1840 there were no slack-water dams in the Monon- gahela River, forming the eastern boundary of the county, and during a large part of the year the river was not navi- gable for steamboats and large barges; but in 1900 dams and locks had been constructed, so that large steamers and barges could carry passengers and freight, merchandise, and coal in all seasons of the year, and slack-water had been carried up the river to Morgantown, beyond the state boun- dary line.
In 1840 we had the National Road, still in good condi- tion, extending through the county from Brownsville to Wheel- ing, beyond the western state line, near West Alexander; and we had also the Washington and Williamsport (uow Monon- gahela) Turnpike, and the Washington and Pittsburg Turn- pike, both long since in decay, and both now thrown open to the public; but we had no railroads whatever. In 1900, however, we had the benefit of railroad communication from Washington in four directions: By the Chartiers Railway to Pittsburg; by the Baltimore & Ohio to Wheeling; by the Waynesburg & Washington to Waynesburg, and by the Balti- more & Ohio by another route to Pittsburg, while a number of other railroads were then either building or under survey.
The line of longitude, dividing the manufacturing and commercial industries of the East from the agricultural re- gion of the West, may be said to be passing, or to have already passed, to the westward of Washington County; but space is not afforded to show by statistics the extent to which the manufacturing and commercial interests of our county have increased since 1840. Suffice it to state that since the discovery of natural gas and oil within the county, beginning
114
COURTS OF JUSTICE, BENCH, AND BAR.
with the McGugin gas-well in Mt. Pleasant township, put down in March, 1882 (Crumrine, p. 850), the development of the county, especially in its manufacturing and commer- cial interests, has been somewhat wonderful.
Moreover, the great change that has lately come to the whole country, in the way of corporate combinations and the re- sulting expansion of production and trade in all their branches, has not left Washington County behind. That county has been carried along in the whirl of business expansion with the rest of the country. As an illustration merely:
In 1840, and indeed subsequently, up to the triennial as- sessment for taxes made in December, 1900, although substan- tially all the lands of the county were underlaid with valuable veins of coal, none of it had ever been assessed for taxes sepa- rately from the surface, and no account was taken of it iu the valuation of lands to the surface owner. But in the three years preceding the triennial assessment of 1900, the Pitts- burg vein of coal (not the only one in the county by any means) had largely become the property of coal companies organized by corporate combinations, and of other mining companies conducted by individual enterprise; so that, by this last triennial assessment, nearly $10,000,000 worth of property down deep in the ground has been brought up within reach of the tax gatherer, in relief more or less of the surface owner. Thus, as shown by a tabulation made in the county commis- sioner's office, and published in the Washington Observer of May 6, 1901, 146,469 acres of coal in twenty-one of thirty- three country districts of the county had been sold to and assessed separately to the following corporations, partnerships, and individuals:
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.