Page 1 of 1

1893 Description of the Court House

Posted: Wed Oct 21, 2009 8:43 pm
by Harry
Thought you'd find this newspaper article interesting. To those who have been inside the court room it will sound very familiar. The major difference from today is that the jury and witnesses were on the right side of the judges' bench in 1893 while today they are on the left as you face the bench.

"The Fall River Daily Herald, Monday, June 5, 1893

AT THE COURT HOUSE.

Arrangements Which Have Been
Made For The Great Trial.

In front of the court house is a magnificent lawn with two fine beds of tulips set in its center, one on either side of the walk. Numerous trees dot the level stretch of grass, and the whole is kept in such good condition that the stranger in New Bedford would never, unless especially directed, pick out the establishment as the legal center of this portion of the county and the place where Lizzie Borden is to learn her fate in a few weeks.

You enter the court house in the center of the front end, and before you stretches away a corridor to the back door. There you have at once the only two entrances to the building, unless the cellar is included. In case of a fire it would be difficult for a crowd to leave the apartment upstairs in time to escape the flames, unless the process of combustion was remarkably slow, and especially as fire escapes are unknown on the structure.

On each side of the long corridor, which runs through the center of the lower portion of the building are the offices and apartments for the different officials, etc. Sharp to the right at the front door are the doors which open on the flight of stairs leading to the court room. These stairs run along by the wall half way and then swing to the left, reaching the court room on the right side about 20 feet away from the front wall. The rear flight of stairs run up to some offices back of the bench, and offer a means of egress after passing through two or three doors.

The judges’ bench is at the rear of the room. It is just like the bench in every court room in this commonwealth. It looks down over the clerk’s seat and the bar inclosure and up toward the spectator’s seats, which are arranged on an incline much like the chairs in a theater, beginning to rise from the bar inclosure to the rear, until at the front wall the highest one is about 10 feet above the topmost stair.

The jury will sit at the right, looking toward the judges’ bench, and within five feet of the foreman is located the stand and rail known as the witness box. Sheriff Wright’s station is directly opposite, where he can see everything going on in the court room, but does not have his attention diverted by any minor details."

Posted: Thu Oct 22, 2009 6:15 pm
by SummerCodSuz
Thank you Harry!

Posted: Fri Oct 23, 2009 12:31 pm
by Tina-Kate
Thanks very much for that Harry!

Posted: Fri Oct 23, 2009 8:02 pm
by mbhenty
:smile:

Yes Harry: The use of the word "Apartment" in the news report is strange. Not sure why the journalist uses "apartment" when he probably means "department".

I never heard the word "apartment" used in any other way but to describe living quarters.

The true essence of the word is derived from the word "apart", or away from the others. Watered down, it could be meant to mean "a room apart from the others?

Just odd use of the word.

But then again, it was used by a journalist; for who I have little respect for. Not only can they not write, they have their own way of saying something. This way if they are wrong they can insist that that is not what they are saying.

Another point:

I like the description of the grounds. Of course, not only are there no money to add and upkeep gardens in public buildings and parks today, but most of it has been taken up by the automobile.

When you look at old post cards of parks, cemetery, byways, public buildings etc. you always found gardens, shrubs, beautiful flowers. Rare today. Sad.



:study:

Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 12:00 pm
by mbhenty
:smile:

Yes, the derogatory declaration I make in the post above about journalists was not very kind. As a matter of fact it was rude, malign and somewhat aggressive talk.

But, non-the-less, the truth.

I have been involved with several news stories, or very familiar with the facts of others, and was amazed by how wrong journalists get it, or how they pick a story apart and print only what the find useful, leaving out vital information.

You've got to hand it to them, though. Journalists are working with strict time constraints. Most of the time there is little clock to verify facts, and what they report must be phrased just so as not to appear to be making any claims.

But, there are time they get it wrong for no reason but recklessness.

:study:

Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 11:55 pm
by Kat
That's cool, Harry-Thanks!Image