Part 12 (1/2)

”It is ordered, that Thomas B. Barton, John L. Marye, Robert B.

Semple, Wm. C. Beale and John J. Chew, who are hereby appointed a committee for that purpose, do examine and report to this court, some plan for the enlargement and repairs or rebuilding of the courthouse for this corporation, for the convenient administration of justice; and the said committee are also requested to examine and report whether any other public building, belonging to this corporation, can be so changed as to answer the above purpose, and to inquire and report the probable cost of such plan or plans as they may approve and report upon, and it is ordered that the justices for this corporation be summoned to attend here at the next court to consider and decide upon said report.”

While this order and the appointment of the committee, with its instructions, created considerable comment, it did not seem to excite the Council or precipitate any action favorable to the proposed building. At the next court eight justices were present in answer to the summons issued at the last session of the court. Those present were R. B. Semple, Robert d.i.c.key, Beverly R. Wellford, Wm. C. Beale, Wm. H. White, Peter Goolrick, Wm. Slaughter and Wm. Warren.

The report of the committee appointed at the previous court, was made, and the court declared ”that in obedience to the act of the General a.s.sembly, which requires that courts for the corporations within this Commonwealth should cause to be erected one good and convenient courthouse, that it is necessary and proper to build a courthouse for this corporation,” and the report of the committee ”having been returned to court, and therewith an order from the county court of Spotsylvania, releasing to this court all t.i.tle and interest the said county has to the jail and courthouse, within this corporation, and the said lots on which they stand, being considered by this court, it is approved and confirmed.”

The court then appointed a commission, consisting of Mayor Semple, Beverly R. Wellford, Wm. H. White, Thomas B. Barton and John L. Marye, who were instructed to contract with some responsible party to erect a good and substantial courthouse on lots 42 and 44, or either of them, according to the plan submitted to the court, or that plan modified, if it was found necessary, the cost not to exceed four thousand dollars. The commission was to report from time to time to the court.

This action looked as if the court intended to exhaust its powers or have a new courthouse, but a few days' mixing with the people seems to have raised a doubt in the minds of the members of the court as to the wisdom of their action. At any rate, when the August term came the full corps of magistrates was present. A pet.i.tion, and counter pet.i.tion of the citizens of Fredericksburg, in relation to the action of the court upon the subject of rebuilding the courthouse, were severally presented, when, on a motion made to rescind the order for building the courthouse and laying a levy therefor, the vote stood as follows:

For rescinding, Robert B. Semple, Peter Goolrick, Wm. C. Beale, Robert d.i.c.ky, 4. Against rescinding, Beverley R. Welford, Wm. H. White, Wm.

Slaughter, Wm. Warren, 4. The court being divided on the question of repealing or enforcing its own order, the subject was dropped so far as any action of the court was concerned, and was not again brought up for several months.

At the April term, in 1850, however, the court respectfully requested the Council to appoint a day to have an election, that the voters might express their wishes as to whether or not a levy should be made for the purpose of building a courthouse. This paper, although it placed the court before the Council in the att.i.tude of an humble suppliant, was read before the Council and laid on the table, as all former papers from that source had been.

This seems to have ended the efforts of the court to secure a new courthouse or the repairing of the old, either by entreaties, threats or by the power given it under the acts of the General a.s.sembly. Thus things continued for one year, although the question was warmly discussed by the citizens, who were very much divided on the subject. An election was to be held the following March, and the court, finding itself defeated in all former efforts, transferred the question to the people in their selections for members of the Council. This was a wise move for the friends of the measure. The election was held and a Council in favor of building a new courthouse was elected. The eyes of the public were now turned from the hustings court to the Common Council which had just been elected. The contest was not long delayed.

The election for Councilmen was held on the third Monday in March, 1851, and at the meeting, held on the first day of April, Messrs. Thomas B.

Barton, John James Chew, J. Minor, Wm. Allen and Beverly R. Wellford were appointed a committee by the Council to consider the subject of the location and erection of a new courthouse and report thereon all matters connected with the cost, style and site of said building.

The next meeting of the Council was held on the 26th of April. It was one of unusual importance, because the committee on the new courthouse was to report, and every member except two was in his seat, and the chamber was crowded to its full capacity by citizens, who felt a special interest in the subject. The committee was in favor of erecting a new courthouse, and therefore reported to the Council plans and specifications for the building, drawn by J. B. Benwick, Jr., of Baltimore, giving the style and the probable cost at $14,000.

The committee recommended the site of the old courthouse, the removal of the jail to the back of the new building and the removal of the clerk's office and engine houses. The report was adopted and the committee was instructed to contract for the erection of the building inside of the estimated cost. This looked as if the Council meant business, and for the next three weeks the question was warmly discussed, and the opponents of the measure undertook to prevent the great waste of money, as they termed it, by pet.i.tion and other influences. The Council met on the 21st of May to receive the report of the committee, appointed to contract for the building, and every member was present. The interest was intense and the opposition determined.

The committee made its report and the clerk of the Council made this record: ”A contract with Wm. M. Baggett, for building a new courthouse, jail, &c., for the sum of $13,850, together with drawings and specifications of said buildings made by James Benwick, architect, and to be taken as part of said contract, and a bond executed by said Baggett, J.

Metcalfe, J. S. Caldwell, and George Aler, in the sum of ten thousand dollars, for the faithful performance of said contract, by said Baggett, were submitted to the Council by T. B. Barton, chairman of the committee appointed for that purpose, for their approval or rejection.

”Whereupon, and before any action was had thereon, Mr. J. M. Whittemore, asked and obtained leave to be heard by the Council in support of a pet.i.tion, signed by one hundred and seventy-two of the voters of the corporation, remonstrating against the extravagant scheme of pulling down the jail and other buildings on the courthouse lot, and praying the appointment of a committee of their own board,[56] to contract for the erection of a s.p.a.cious and comfortable courthouse at a cost not exceeding six thousand dollars. Said pet.i.tion was accordingly presented by Mr.

Whittemore, and, being read, was, on motion, laid on the table.

”On motion, said contract was then approved and confirmed by the following vote to-wit: Ayes: F. Slaughter, Joseph Sanford, J. Minor, D. H. Gordon, J. Pritchard, L. J. Huffman, B. S. Herndon, Thomas F. Knox, Charles C.

Wellford and John J. Berrey, 10. Nays: Hugh Scott and Wm. Allen, 2. And it was ordered that the Mayor, as evidence of said approval and confirmation, do sign an endors.e.m.e.nt to that effect on said contract, and cause the corporation seal to be affixed thereto, and that said contract together with the drawings and specifications, be then delivered to the clerk of the hustings court for safe keeping,” &c.

After this action was completed the Council appointed Messrs. Thomas B.

Barton, John James Chew, J. Minor, Wm. Allen and Beverly R. Wellford a committee to superintend the entire work and see that it was done according to the plans and specifications. And so a question that had vexed the people of the town for more than thirty years, and had caused considerable friction between the hustings court and the Common Council, was settled and the town was to have a new courthouse.

The building was completed in 1852, when the courts and clerks were removed to s.p.a.cious and comfortable quarters, and have remained there to the present day. The south wing on the lower floor has been used for fire engines until the companies were disbanded prior to the war; but, for several years in the past, they have been used for the public schools of the city, while the large room on the second floor is used for an armory.

The vault, for the records and papers of all the courts of the past and present, as well as of those of the Common Council, is ample for the purpose and absolutely fire-proof. The building is one of the handsomest in the State and always attracts the attention of strangers.

[Ill.u.s.tration: ”The Lodge” at Mary Was.h.i.+ngton Monument. Constructed of Virginia Granite for Superintendent of Monument and Grounds. (See page 160)]

[Ill.u.s.tration: The ”Wallace Library,” now near its completion. The building and library a donation by the late Capt. C. Wistar Wallace. (See page 145)]

The old courthouse, that was torn down to make room for the new one, was provided with a bell for calling the people together. It was used to call public meetings, to notify the people of the a.s.sembling of the courts, and, until another bell was provided for the purpose, to sound the alarms for fires. This bell now hangs in the belfry of the present courthouse. It was presented to the town by Silas Wood in 1828 and has been on duty more than three-quarters of a century. Mr. Wood married a Fredericksburg lady, and it is reported that he was a believer in the adage that a fair exchange (rather an exchange for the fair) was not robbery; therefore, as he had taken one bell (belle) from Fredericksburg he ought to give it another in exchange. The bell has this inscription on it: ”Revere, Boston.

Presented to the Corporation of Fredericksburg by Silas Wood, A. D. 1828.”