The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Fairfax County Courthouse, by
Ross D. Netherton and Ruby Waldeck
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
Title: The Fairfax County Courthouse
Author: Ross D. Netherton
Ruby Waldeck
Release Date: May 10, 2009 [EBook #28750]
Language: English
*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE FAIRFAX COUNTY COURTHOUSE ***
Produced by Mark C. Orton, Chris Logan and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
[Illustration: The old courthouse about 1920. Copy courtesy Lee
Hubbard.]
The Fairfax County
Courthouse
[Illustration]
The Fairfax County Courthouse
BY
ROSS D. NETHERTON
AND
RUBY WALDECK
Published by the Fairfax County Office of Comprehensive Planning under
the direction of the County Board of Supervisors in cooperation with
the Fairfax County History Commission
July 1977
The following history publications are available from:
Fairfax County Administrative Services
Fairfax Building
10555 Main Street
Fairfax, Va. 22030
703-691-2781
_Beginning at a White Oak.... The Patents and Northern Neck Grants
of Fairfax County, Virginia_--Mitchell
_Carlby_--Spann
_Centreville_: Its History and Architecture--Smith
_Colchester_: Colonial Port on the Potomac--Sprouse
_Colvin Run Mill_--Netherton
_Dunbarton, Dranesville, Virginia_--Poland
_The Fairfax County Courthouse_--Netherton and Waldeck
_The Fairfax County Courthouse_--1800--OCP--Brochure
_Fairfax County in Virginia: Selections from Some Rare
Sources_--OCP
_Fairfax County Tour Map_--OCP and History Commission
_Fairfax Family in Fairfax County: A Brief History_--Kilmer and
Sweig
_Historic Preservation for Fairfax County_--OCP
_Historical Highlights of Bull Run Regional Park_--Cooling
_Huntley_--Wrenn
_Indices to Selected Maps from Hopkins' Atlas, 1879_--McMillion
_Maplewood_--Rafuse
_Moorefield_--DiBacco
_Mount Air_--Sprouse
_Registrations of Free Blacks, Fairfax County, Virginia,
1822-1861_--ed. Sweig
_Wakefield Chapel_--Evans
* * * * *
_Sully: The Biography of a House_--Gamble
Book available from the Fairfax County Park Authority
* * * * *
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 77-84441
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ILLUSTRATIONS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
FOREWORD
INTRODUCTION 1
I. FAIRFAX COUNTY'S EARLY COURTHOUSES: 1742-1800 3
II. THE PROVIDENCE COURTHOUSE AND ITS RELATED
BUILDINGS: 1800-1860 12
III. THE COUNTY COURT AND ITS OFFICERS 18
IV. THE WAR YEARS: 1861-1865 33
V. THE YEARS OF REBUILDING: 1865-1903 42
VI. THE TWENTIETH CENTURY COURTHOUSE 50
VII. THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE COURTHOUSE AND ITS RELATED
BUILDINGS 58
1. The Courthouse Complex 58
2. The Courthouse 73
3. Restoration of the Original Wing of the
Courthouse, 1967 87
APPENDIXES
A. County Court Clerks: 1742-1976 107
B. Justices and Judges: 1742-1976 108
C. Portraits in the Old Courthouse--Biographies 117
D. Clerk's Office Specifications, _Alexandria
Gazette_, July 15, 1853 121
E. Schedule of Reconstruction of the Courthouse, 1967 123
LIST OF SOURCES 127
ILLUSTRATIONS
Front Cover--Courthouse about 1920
Back Cover--Court papers, 1976
Five Colonial Justices of the Fairfax County Court: George
Washington; George Mason; Thomas, sixth Lord Fairfax;
George William Fairfax; and Bryan, eighth Lord Fairfax 2
Cartograph of Alexandria Courthouse Square 6
Surveys of courthouse lot, 1798-1924 15
Civil War view, 1862 32
Hopkins' map of Fairfax Court House, 1879 44
Marr monument's dedication, 1904 49
The Tavern, c. 1932 51
1907 courthouse picture 51
Two aerials of the courthouse and county center
complex, 1970s 55
Clerk's Office, 1907 61
County Jail, 1886 63
Police Department, c. 1947 63
Naval Cannon 67
Marr Monument 67
War Memorial plaques 68
Central staircase mural 69
18th century English town and market halls 76
Two-story windows, c. 1966; double row windows, 1967 80
Courtroom remodeled in 1920 82
Central entrance, 1954 addition 83
Floor plans 88
Three views of the gutted courthouse, 1966 90
Two interiors of the courthouse restoration, c. 1968 92
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This monograph is one of a series of research reports on the
historical and architectural landmarks of Fairfax County, Virginia. It
has been prepared under the supervision of the Fairfax County Office
of Comprehensive Planning, in cooperation with the Fairfax County
History Commission, pursuant to a resolution of the Board of County
Supervisors calling for a survey of the County's historic sites and
buildings.
The authors of this report wish to acknowledge with thanks the
assistance of Lindsey Carne, Mrs. J. H. Elliott, Lee Hubbard, Mrs.
Jean Johnson Rust, and Mrs. Barry Sullivan, who provided information
and graphics for this publication. Also valuable were the comments of
the Honorable James Keith, Circuit Court Judge; Mrs. Edith M. Sprouse;
John K. Gott; Mrs. Catharine Ratiner; and Mayo S. Stuntz, all of whom
reviewed the manuscript with care prior to its final revisions.
Special thanks are tendered to the Honorable Thomas P. Chapman, Jr.
and the Honorable W. Franklin Gooding, former Clerks of the Courts of
Fairfax County; the Honorable James Hoofnagle, present Clerk of the
Courts; and to Walter M. Macomber, architect of the 1967
reconstruction of the original wing of the courthouse, who granted
extensive interviews which filled many of the gaps created by lack of
documentary sources.
Throughout the entire research and writing of this report, the authors
received valuable guidance and comments from the members of the
Fairfax County History Commission and assistance from the staffs of
the Fairfax County Public Library and the Virginia State Library.
Finally, the authors acknowledge with thanks the help of Jay Linard,
Mrs. Verna McFeaters, Ms. Virginia Inge, Ms. Irene Rouse, Ms. Annette
Thomas, and Ms. Robin Pedlar in manuscript preparation.
Ross Netherton
Ruby Waldeck
FOREWORD
_The Fairfax County Courthouse_ is an important addition to the
historical record of Fairfax County, Virginia. It brings together in
one volume a history of the Fairfax County Courthouses and a manual of
the organization and operation of governmental affairs centered within
them over the years. A particular insight with regard to the early
years of the county is evident.
Dr. Netherton and Mrs. Waldeck describe the consequential role the
courthouse enjoyed as a social center as they examine the governmental
role which made it the centerpiece of Fairfax County. The reader will
note that the early Fairfax County officials gained an understanding
of the importance of democratic government in our nation through their
participation in county government while the people they served
developed a sense of community through their interaction at the
courthouse. The present courthouse stands as a monument to the
governmental and social prosperity Fairfax County has enjoyed.
This text documents the story of the building which has stood at the
center of almost two centuries of political life in Fairfax County.
The extensive footnotes will prove an invaluable aid to scholars
exploring the history of the county. History students in our county's
schools will find _The Fairfax County Courthouse_ an important
addition to their reading lists. We are all indebted to Ross Netherton
and Ruby Waldeck for their contribution in casting such a revealing
light upon the roots of Fairfax County, her people and government.
James E. Hoofnagle
Clerk of the Fairfax County Court
INTRODUCTION
Each generation of Americans has acknowledged its debt to Virginia's
leaders whose skill in politics was demonstrated so well in a
half-century that saw independence achieved and a new republic
established. They were products of a system of government which itself
had been perfected over more than 150 years before the colonies
declared their independence. To these men--George Washington, George
Mason, Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, John Marshall, George Wythe,
James Madison, and the Carters--the County court was an academy for
education in the art of government. Important as it was to sit in the
House of Burgesses at Williamsburg, the lessons of politics and public
administration were learned best in the work of carrying on the
government of a county. Virginia counties were unique in colonial
history, for the considerable degree of autonomy enjoyed by the County
courts gave them both a taste of responsibility for a wide range of
public affairs and a measure of insulation from the changes of
political fortune which determined events in Williamsburg, and later
Richmond.
In Virginia, the county courthouse was the focal point of public
affairs. Usually built in a central location, with more regard for
accessibility from all corners of the county than for proximity to
established centers of commerce, the courthouse came to be a unique
complex of buildings related to the work of the court. In time, most
of these clusters of buildings grew into towns or cities, but
throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries many places shown
on Virginia maps as "Court House" consisted literally of a county
courthouse and its related structures standing alone beside a
crossroads.
On court days, however, the scene changed. The monthly sessions of the
court, conducted in colonial times by the "Gentleman Justices",
provided opportunities to transact all manner of public business--from
issuing licenses and collecting taxes to hearing litigation and
holding elections. They also were social events and market days; there
people came to meet their friends, hear the news, see who came
circuit-riding with the justices, sell their produce, and buy what
they needed.
In the two centuries since independence, profound changes have
occurred in all phases of life that were centered in the courthouse.
In Fairfax County, the pace and extent of these changes have been
extensive. Architectural historians who note uniqueness in the fact
that Virginia courthouses developed as a complex of related buildings
may see ominous symbolism in the fact that today one of the structures
in the cluster around Fairfax County's courthouse is a modern
fifteen-story county office building. Yet, at the same time this
office building was being planned, workmen were rehabilitating the
original section of the courthouse to represent its presumed
appearance in an earlier time, thus providing a reminder of the
historic role of county government in Virginia.
[Illustration: Five Colonial Justices of the Fairfax County
Court--George Mason.]
[Illustration: Five Colonial Justices of the Fairfax County
Court--George Washington.]
[Illustration: Five Colonial Justices of the Fairfax County
Court--Bryan, later eighth Lord Fairfax.]
[Illustration: Five Colonial Justices of the Fairfax County
Court--Thomas, sixth Lord Fairfax.]
[Illustration: Five Colonial Justices of the Fairfax County
Court--George William Fairfax.]
CHAPTER I
FAIRFAX COUNTY'S EARLY COURTHOUSES, 1742-1800
Once the survival of the colony of Jamestown seemed assured, provision
for the efficient and orderly conduct of public affairs received
attention. The Jamestown colonist and his backers in the Virginia
Company of London were familiar with county government structure in
England, and from early colonial times the county was the basic unit
of local government in Virginia.
In the concept of county government, the role of the county court was
central. As early as 1618, Governor Sir George Yeardley established
the prototype of the County Court in his order stating that "A County
Court be held in convenient places, to sit monthly, and to hear civil
and criminal cases."[1] The magistrates or justices who comprised the
court were, as might be expected, the owners of the large plantations
and estates in the vicinity, and all were used to administering the
affairs of the people and lands under their control. Accordingly,
administrative duties as well as judicial duties were given to the
court, and the justices' responsibilities included such matters as the
issuance of marriage licenses, the planning of roads, and assessment
of taxes.[2]
Colonial Virginia statutes specified that each county should "cause to
be built a courthouse of brick, stone or timber; one common gaol,
well-secured with iron bars, bolts and locks, one pillory, whipping
post and stocks."[3] In addition, the law authorized construction of a
ducking stool, if deemed necessary, and required establishment of a
10-acre tract in which those imprisoned for minor crimes might, on
good behavior, walk for exercise. In addition, buildings were
customarily provided to house the office of the Clerk of the Court,
and to accommodate the justices of the assize and their entourage of
lawyers and others who accompanied them as they rode circuit among the
counties of the colony. In England, the "assizes" were sessions of the
justices' courts which met, generally twice a year in each shire, for
trial of questions of fact in both civil and criminal cases. The
county courts in colonial Virginia continued to be called assizes for
much of the 18th Century.
When events moved toward the partition of Prince William County to
create the County of Fairfax, the Journal of the Governor in Council
in Williamsburg recorded the following entry:
Saturday, June ye 19th, 1742
....
ORDERED that the Court-house for Fairfax County be appointed at a
place call'd Spring Fields scituated between the New Church and Ox
Road in the Branches of Difficult Run, Hunting Creek and
Accotinck.[4]
Whether this was the first seat of the Fairfax County Court is not
positively known. It is possible that the first sessions of the court
may have been held at Colchester. Although no records of the
transactions at these sessions have been found, an early history of
the County cites entries in an early deed book which order the removal
of the County Court's records from Colchester to a new courthouse more
centrally located in the county.[5]
Be this as it may, the plan to establish a courthouse which was
formalized by the Governor in Council apparently was deliberately
designed to accommodate the increasing settlement of areas inland from
the river plantations--an interest which the Proprietor, Thomas sixth
Lord Fairfax, shared.
"Spring Fields", the site of the court house, was part of a tract of
1,429 acres owned in 1740 by John Colvill, and conveyed by him in that
year to William Fairfax.[6] In this tract were numerous springs
forming the sources of Difficult Run, Accotinck Creek, Wolf Trap Run,
Scott's Run and Pimmit Run. It was high ground, comprising part of the
plateau area of the northern part of the County, and the site selected
for the courthouse had a commanding view for many miles around.
The location specified in the Council Order was on the New Church
Road (later known variously as the Eastern Ridge Road, the
Alexandria-Leesburg Road, or the Middle Turnpike) running from the
Falls Church to Vestal's Gap in the Blue Ridge Mountains, at a point
where this road intersected the Ox Road, running north and west from
the mouth of the Occoquan River. A map of 1748 also shows roads
running from the courthouse west in the direction of Aldie, and
southwest toward Newgate (now called Centreville).[7] The site was
roughly equidistant for persons coming from Alexandria, Newgate, and
the Goose Creek settlements, but somewhat farther for those from
Colchester.
The land on which courthouse was built was conveyed to the County by
deed from William Fairfax, dated September 24, 1745,[8] and described
six acres "where the court house of the said county is to be built and
erected," to be held by the County "during the time the said Court
shall be located there but no longer." According to a survey made in
March 1742, the site was a rectangle, 40 poles long by 24 poles wide,
described in metes and bounds starting from a post on the west side of
"Court House Spring Branch".[9] No other landmarks or monuments
capable of surviving to modern times were mentioned in the deed, and
today the site of the Springfield Courthouse can be determined as
approximately one-quarter mile south and west of Tyson's Corner.
Having in mind the statutory requirements, it is presumed that the
complex of buildings at Springfield consisted of a courthouse, a jail
with related structures, a clerk's office, and one or more "necessary
houses" (outhouses), all conveniently located with respect to each
other and the roads. County records show surveys for two ordinaries
(inns) located on or adjacent to the courthouse tract. One of these,
surveyed in 1746, was a two-acre parcel containing John West's
ordinary and related buildings, and the other, also surveyed in 1746,
was for one acre within the courthouse tract on which John Colvill was
allowed to build an ordinary.
No contemporary descriptions of the courthouse have survived, but it
is likely that the buildings were of log construction, on stone
foundations, with brick chimneys. A 16-foot-square addition to the
courthouse was ordered in 1749, with the specification that it have a
brick chimney.[10] An item from the Court Order Book, dated December
23, 1750, states:
On motion of the clerk of the court that papers lying on the table
are frequently mixed and confused, and many times thrown down by
persons crowding in and throwing their hats and gloves on the said
table, the ill consequences thereof being considered, it is
ordered that Charles Broadwater, Gent. agree with some workman to
erect a bar around the said clerk's table for the better
security of the books and papers.[11]
[Illustration: Cartograph of the Market Square and Fairfax County
Courthouse in Alexandria, as they might have appeared in the
eighteenth century. Drawn by Worth Bailey, 1949.]
In 1750, Fairfax County's western border closely approached the edge
of English settlement in Virginia. Settlements in the western part of
the County were growing far less rapidly than in the centers of
population in the eastern part. Alexandria, established as a town in
1749, showed signs of becoming a major seaport, and its merchants
complained that travel to the courthouse at Springfield was
burdensome, and that service of process and execution of writs was
well-nigh impossible.[12] They actively campaigned for moving the
courthouse to Alexandria, and overcame the opposition of the
"up-country" residents by offering to provide a suitable lot and build
a new courthouse in Alexandria.
Alexandria prevailed in 1752, and the records of the colonial Governor
in Council showed the following entries:
March 23, 1752. A petition subscribed by many of the principal
inhabitants of Fairfax County for removing the court house and
prison of that county to the town of Alexandria, which they
propose to build by subscription, was this day read, ORDERED that
the justices of the said county be acquainted therewith and
required to signify their objection against such removal, if they
have any, by the 25th of next month, on which day the Board will
resume the consideration thereof.
And:
April 25, 1752. Upon the petition of many of the inhabitants of
Fairfax County for removing the court house and prison of the said
county by subscription to the town of Alexandria, the Board being
satisfy'd that it is generally desired by the people, and on
notice given, no objection being made to it, ORDERED that the
court house and prison be removed accordingly to the town of
Alexandria.[13]
By May 1752, the County Court's Minute Book carried the final record
of business transacted at the Spring Fields Courthouse.
In Alexandria, the townspeople set aside two lots in the block of the
original town survey bounded by Fairfax Street, Cameron Street and
King Street.[14] By ordinance, all buildings in the town had to face
the street and have chimneys of brick or stone, rather than wood, to
prevent fires.[15] The building erected as the new courthouse faced
Fairfax Street, between Cameron and King Streets. A prison was built
behind the courthouse building in the dedicated lots. The gallows,
however, are said to have remained at Spring Fields for some time.[16]
Neither the architect nor the builder of the courthouse at Alexandria
are known, although there is evidence that John Carlyle helped with
the building of both the courthouse and market square.[17]
In the last half of the eighteenth century, Alexandria prospered as
the principal seaport of the Northern Neck. Its wharves and warehouses
were busy, and its politics were enlivened by the presence of some of
the colonies' most distinguished residents and visitors. As tobacco
gave way to diversified farming, wheat and flour comprised two of
Alexandria's major commodities of trade, and enforcement of the flour
inspection and marking laws became an important governmental function.
Criminal justice was dispensed publicly in the courthouse and jail
yard, furnishing moral lessons for both the culprits and observing
crowds. It was in this jail, too, that tradition has it Jeremiah
Moore, a dynamic Baptist minister of colonial Virginia, delivered a
sermon to crowds outside his cell window while he was confined for
preaching without a license.[18]
The court records for the years 1752 to 1798 show the names of many
Virginians who were leaders in the War of Independence and the
subsequent establishment of the new state government. Independence did
not significantly affect the judicial system, however, and, except for
their new allegiance, state and local officials conducted public
business much as they had in the 1760's.
During the years of war, however, the courthouse suffered
substantially because of lack of maintenance. After the war, repairs
frequently were postponed due to arguments over whether the state or
locality should raise the money for them. Thus, the court records of
the post-war period show frequent references to the need for repairs
on the courthouse and jail,[19] most, apparently, without success.
There were more serious questions being raised about the future of
the courthouse in Alexandria's market square. Alexandria no longer was
central to the County's most important interests. Its port was losing
trade to rivals, principally Baltimore, and the voice of the growing
numbers of settlers in the western part of the county complained that
Alexandria merchants gained at the expense of others by having the
court meet in their town. George Mason of Gunston Hall felt that
Alexandria politicians were building up too strong a hold on the
machinery of County government, and sought the aid of members of the
General Assembly to arrange for changing the location of the
courthouse.[20] Finally, in 1798, the Virginia General Assembly
directed that Fairfax County's Court House be relocated to a site
closer to the center of the County.[21]
The search for a suitable site had gone on for almost ten years
previously and might not have been concluded even then if its urgency
had not been sharpened by the passage of Congressional legislation
leading to creation of the District of Columbia, and the threat that
Alexandria would fall within the boundaries of the new Federal
capital. Since by law the County Court could not meet outside the
boundaries of the County, no further delay could be permitted. Land
was acquired, a new courthouse was built, and the County Court moved
into its new quarters early in 1800.[22]
NOTES FOR CHAPTER I
[1] Albert O. Porter, _County Government in Virginia_, (New York:
Columbia University Press, 1947), p. 13.
[2] _A Hornbook of Virginia History_, (Richmond: Virginia State
Library, 1965), p. 64.
[3] Virginia, Laws, 1748, c. 7, revising earlier statutes on courts
enacted in 1662 and 1679.
[4] Wilmer Hall (Ed.), _Executive Journals of the Council of Colonial
Virginia_, (Richmond: Virginia State Library, 1945), V. 93.
[5] _Industrial and Historical Sketch of Fairfax County_, (Fairfax:
County Board of County Supervisors, 1907), p. 45.
[6] Northern Neck Grants Book, Liber E, p. 182. William Fairfax was a
cousin of the Proprietor, and acted as his agent.
[7] The so-called Truro Parish Partition Map, purporting to lay out
boundaries for a division of Truro Parish to create a new parish for
the western settlements. See _Virginia Magazine of History and
Biography_, XXXVI, 180.
[8] Fairfax County Deed Book, Liber A, No. 2, p. 494.
[9] Fairfax County Deed Book, Liber A, Pt. 1, p. 52, Survey, March 17,
1742.
[10] E. Sprouse (ed), Fairfax County Abstracts: Court Order Books,
1749-1792, citing Order Book, 1749-54, December 26, 1749, p. 49.
[11] _Ibid._, p. 131. Charles Broadwater was one of the justices.
[12] There was some reason to support this, apparently, for in 1748
the General Assembly reduced the number of court meetings to four per
year for these reasons. See Virginia, Laws, 1742, c. 32; Laws, 1748,
c. 59; Laws, 1752, c. 7.
[13] _Virginia Gazette_, reprinted in _William & Mary Quarterly_, XII,
215.
[14] Cited in Mary G. Powell, _The History of Old Alexandria, Virginia
from July 13, 1749 to May 24, 1861_, (Richmond: William Byrd Press,
1928), p. 35.
[15] _Ibid._, p. 22.
[16] Jeanne Rust, _History of the Town of Fairfax_, (Washington: Moore
& Moore, 1960), p. 30.
[17] Gay M. Moore, _Seaport on the Potomac_, (Richmond: Garrett &
Massie, 1949), p. 12.
[18] William C. Moore, "Jeremiah Moore: 1746-1815," _William & Mary
Quarterly_, 2d ser., XIII, 18, 21. Tradition also holds that Jeremiah
Moore was defended by Patrick Henry, but this has not been verified.
[19] Robert Anderson, "The Administration of Justice in the Counties
of Fairfax, and Alexandria and the City of Alexandria", _Arlington
Historical Magazine_, II, No. 1 (October 1961), 19-21.
[20] "Letters of George Mason to Zachariah Johnston", _Tyler's
Quarterly Review_, V (January 1924), 189.
[21] Virginia, Laws, 1797-98, c. 37; Shepherd, _Statutes at Large_,
II, 107.
[22] During the 1780's the court was compelled to leave the original
courthouse building for temporary quarters. Harrison, _Landmarks_, p.
343, states that during this period the County Court met in the
Alexandria Town House, located next door, which also housed the
Hustings Court. He also states that the Clerk of the County Court set
up his offices in a nearby school building. The _Alexandria Gazette_,
November 13, 1878, reported the demolition of an old house on the
south side of Duke Street, east of St. Asaph's Street, which it stated
had served as the office of the Clerk of Alexandria's Hustings Court
and the Fairfax County Court commencing in the spring of 1793.
CHAPTER II
THE PROVIDENCE COURTHOUSE AND ITS RELATED BUILDINGS: 1800-1860
_Location and Construction_
The resolution of the General Assembly ordering relocation of the
courthouse was not specific as to the site on which it would be built.
Accordingly, in May 1790, the court appointed a commission to inspect
a site near Ravensworth, within a mile of the crossroads at Price's
Ordinary, and to negotiate for purchase of a two-acre parcel.[23] The
commissioners' report was not favorable to the site, however, and
negotiations for other land continued until, in May 1798, a group of
commissioners was appointed to inspect a site at Earp's Corner
(between a road which later became the Little River Turnpike and the
Ox Road), owned by Richard Ratcliffe.[24] The commissioners reported
favorably, and Ratcliffe was persuaded to sell four acres to the
County for one dollar. A sale was made, and the deed recorded on June
27, 1799.[25]
Work had begun on the new courthouse some six months earlier, as
indicated by the following notice appearing in the _Columbia Mirror
and Alexandria Advertiser_:
The Fairfax Court House Commissioners have fixed on Thursday the
28th instant for letting out the erection of the necessary Public
Buildings to the lowest bidder. As they have adopted the plan of
Mr. Wren, those workmen who mean to attend may have sight of the
plan.
Charles Little
David Stuart
William Payne
James Wren
Charles Minor[26]
The successful bidders at this event were John Bogue, a carpenter and
builder newly arrived in the United States, and his partner, Mungo
Dykes. They completed the construction of the courthouse late in 1799,
and on January 27, 1800, the Commissioners reported to the County
Court that they had received the "necessary buildings for the holding
of the Court", and found them "executed agreeably to the
contract".[27]
Within the four-acre courthouse tract, a half-acre was laid off to
provide space to build an office for the Clerk of the Court.[28] This
original tract did not provide enough ground for the jail yard and
other grounds comprising the courthouse compound.[29] Accordingly, in
March 1800 the Court ordered William Payne to prepare a new survey of
the compound, enlarged to accommodate all of the facilities required
by the law. The area of this new survey was ten acres, capable of
accommodating courthouse, jail, clerk's office, gallows and pillory, a
stable, a storehouse and possibly an ordinary.[30]
The equipping of the courthouse and transfer of the court's records
were accomplished by March 1800, so that the _Columbia Mirror and
Alexandria Advertiser_ was able to carry a notice its March 29th
edition that
The County Court of Fairfax is adjourned from the town of
Alexandria to the New Court House, in the Center of the County,
where suitors and others who have business are hereby notified to
attend on the 3d Monday in April next.
Thus, the first recorded meeting of the court in the new courthouse
was on April 21, 1800.[31] Meanwhile, in Alexandria, the Mayor and
Council adopted a resolution giving to Peter Wagener the title to the
bricks of the old courthouse on Alexandria's market square as
indemnity for pulling it down.[32]
_Fairfax Courthouse and the Town of Providence_
The central location of the new courthouse and the improvement of its
accessibility through the construction of several turnpike roads
commencing in the early 1800's, led naturally to the growth of a
community around the courthouse. In the vicinity of the crossroads a
few buildings antedated the courthouse. Earp's store, probably built
in the late 1700's, was one such building, as were dwelling houses
reputedly built by the Moss family and Thomas Love.[33]
Development of more nearby land was not long delayed. In 1805 the
General Assembly authorized establishment of a new town at Earp's
store, to be named Providence.[34] The future growth of the town was
forecast in a plat laying off a rectangular parcel of land adjacent to
the Little River Turnpike into nineteen lots for building.[35]
Settlement during the next few decades was relatively slow. Rizen
Willcoxen built a brick tavern across the turnpike from the
courthouse.[36] A variety of "mechanics" and merchants opened their
workshops and stores to serve the local residents and travellers on
the turnpike, and, on the north side of the turnpike, a store was
established by a man named Gerard Boiling.[37] Also, a school for
girls occupied land across the turnpike from the present Truro
Episcopal Church, and, east of the courthouse crossroads, a Frenchman
named D'Astre built a distillery and winery and developed a
vineyard.[38]
Martin's 1835 _Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia_
described Fairfax Court House Post Office as follows: "In addition to
the ordinary county buildings, some 50 dwelling houses (for the most
part frame buildings), 3 mercantile stores, 4 taverns, and one
school."[39] The "mechanics" located in the town included boot and
shoe makers, saddlers, blacksmiths and tailors. The town's population
totalled 200, of which four attorneys and two physicians comprised the
professions. Somewhat later, the town's industry was augmented by
establishment of the Cooper Carriage Works on the turnpike west of the
courthouse.[40]
This growth of services around the seat of the county government was
an added inducement for the County's residents to gather in town when
court was in session, to trade, transact their business at the
courthouse, and exchange the news of the day. By the 1830's the
schedule of court days had expanded to include sessions of the County
Court (3d Monday each month), the Quarter Sessions (in March, June,
August and November), and the Circuit Superior Court (25th of May and
October).[41]
At these times the court would sit for several days--as long as
necessary--to complete the County's business. A quorum of the total
panel of appointed justices was necessary to conduct the court, but
this number generally was small enough so that no hardship was
suffered by those who had to leave their private concerns. In every
third month, the meetings of the court would also be the occasion for
convening the successor to the colonial courts of the Quarter
Sessions, at which criminal charges not involving capital punishment
were tried.
Throughout the first half of the nineteenth century, the sessions of
the County Court continued to be the chief feature of life in the town
of Providence, or Fairfax Court House, as it frequently was called.
When the court was not in session, the regular passage of carriages,
wagons, and herds along the Little River Turnpike was the main form of
contact which residents had with areas outside the locality. This
situation continued even after the coming of the railroads, for when
the Orange & Alexandria Railroad was chartered in 1848, its route was
laid out several miles south of Providence. Thus, the nearest rail
stations for the courthouse community were at Fairfax Station, on the
Orange & Alexandria Railroad, and at Manassas, where the Manassas Gap
Railroad left the Orange & Alexandria and ran to Harrisonburg.[42]
[Illustration: Four acres of Richard Ratcliffe's land near Caleb
Earp's Store laid off for the courthouse and other public buildings.
Record of Surveys, Section 2, p. 79, 1798.]
[Illustration: Ten acres of land surrounding the courthouse laid off
for the prison bounds. Record of Surveys, Section 2, p. 93, 1800.]
[Illustration: Ten acres of land surrounding the courthouse intended
for the prison bounds. Fairfax County Deed Book V-2, p. 208, 1824.]
[Illustration: One-half acre, part of the four-acre courthouse lot,
laid off for the Clerk of the County and his successors. Record of
Surveys, Section 2, p. 115, 1799.]
NOTES FOR CHAPTER II
[23] Fairfax County Court Order Book, 1789-1791, p. 93.
[24] _Ibid._, pp. 189-191.
[25] Fairfax County Deed Book B-2, pp. 373-377.
[26] _Columbia Mirror & Alexandria Advertiser_, June 19, 1798. John
Bogue had arrived in the United States with his family in 1795. On
June 20, 1795, the _Alexandria Gazette_ published his signed statement
thanking the captain of the ship "Two Sisters" for a good voyage. In
the August 1, 1795 issue of the _Gazette_, he advertised as a joiner
and cabinet maker on Princess Street near Hepburn's Wharf, "hoping to
succeed as his abilities shall preserve him deserving."
[27] Fairfax County Deed Book, B-2, p. 503.
[28] Fairfax County Record of Surveys, 1742-1850, p. 115.
[29] Fairfax County Deed Book, B-2, p. 503.
[30] Interview with former Clerk of Courts, Thomas Chapman of Fairfax,
Virginia, February 13, 1970.
[31] One of the items to come before the court at this session
involved winding up the county's contract with John Bogue and Mungo
Dykes. The Court's Clerk, Robert Moss, was summoned to appear and show
cause why he had not paid the contractors in conformance with the
commissioners' report accepting the buildings. Moss produced a receipt
for this payment, signed by Mr. Bogue's agent, who apparently had not
passed it along to his principal. Fairfax County Court Order Book,
1799-1800, p. 509.
[32] Powell, _Old Alexandria_, p. 38.
[33] Elizabeth Burke, "Our Heritage: A History of Fairfax County",
_Yearbook of the Historical Society of Fairfax County_, 1956-7, 5:4.
[34] _Ibid._, 32.
[35] Fairfax County Deed Book, M-2, p. 56.
[36] Rust, _Town of Fairfax_, p. 3.
[37] Gerard Bolling was the father-in-law of Richard Ratcliffe who had
provided the four-acre tract on which the courthouse had been built.
Rust, _Fairfax_, p. 31.
[38] _Ibid._
[39] Joseph Martin, _Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of
Columbia_, (Charlottesville, 1835), p. 168. The name "Providence"
apparently was less favored than the traditional Virginia style of
referring to the seat of county government.
[40] Rust, _Fairfax_, p. 37.
[41] Martin, _Gazetteer_, pp. 168-169.
[42] Marshall Andrews, "A History of Railroads in Fairfax County",
_Yearbook of the Historical Society of Fairfax County_, III (1954),
30-31.
CHAPTER III
THE COUNTY COURT AND ITS OFFICERS
_The functions and officers of the colonial court_
In colonial Virginia local government was centered in the County
Court. Its origins as a political and social institution have been
attributed to various prototypes in Tudor and earlier English history.
By the time Fairfax County was established in 1742, this institution
and its functions in colonial Virginia had been clearly formulated and
accepted.[43]
The County Court evolved from the colony's original court established
at Jamestown and consisting of the Governor and Council sitting as a
judicial tribunal. In 1618, the Governor ordered courts to be held
monthly at convenient places throughout the colony to save litigants
the expense of traveling to Jamestown. Steadily the numbers of these
courts increased and their jurisdiction expanded until, by the end of
the seventeenth century, these local courts could hear all cases
except those for which capital punishment was provided. In effect,
their jurisdiction combined the contemporary English government's
King's Bench, Common Pleas, Chancery, Exchequer, Admiralty, and
Ecclesiastical courts.
During this period the local courts acquired numerous non-judicial
responsibilities connected with the transaction of public and private
affairs. Because of both tradition and convenience, the County Court
was the logical agency to set tax rates, oversee the survey of roads
and construction of bridges, approve inventories and appraisals of
estates, record the conveyance of land, and the like. Therefore, the
court's work reflected a mixture of judicial and administrative
functions, and the officers of the court became the chief magistrates
of the Crown and of their communities. Once this pattern of authority
and organization was developed, it continued with very few basic
changes throughout the eighteenth and most of the nineteenth
centuries.
Highest in the hierarchy of the officers of the county and the court
were the justices. Originally designated as "commissioners", and, by
the 1850's referred to as "magistrates", their full title was "Justice
of the Peace" after their English counterparts of this period.[44]
Popular usage in Virginia, however, fostered the custom of speaking of
the members of the court as "Gentleman Justices". They were both the
products and caretakers of a system that placed control of public
affairs in the hands of an aristocratic class, and at any time in the
County's history up to mid-nineteenth century a list of the County's
justices was certain to include the best leadership the County had.
Appointments were for life, and lacked any provision for compensation.
Service on the court was, therefore, considered an honorable
obligation of those whose position and means permitted them to perform
it. That this was considered a serious and active responsibility was
indicated by the fact that justices could be fined for non-attendance
at court.[45] Through the colonial period and well after the War of
Independence the justices of the county court were appointed by the
governor, and, although episodes during this period indicated the
recurrence of friction between the governor and General Assembly over
the power to make these appointments, neither the local court nor the
Assembly was able to assert permanently its claim to participate in
the appointment process.[46] The number of justices of the county
court varied considerably in different counties and times. By law the
number was set at eight members; yet in 1769 Fairfax County had 17
justices, and appeared to be typical of other counties in the
region.[47]
Appointments to the county court in some instances seemed almost
hereditary, for when a justice of one of the prominent local families
died or retired to attend to other interests it frequently occurred
that his place was taken by a younger relative. Historian Charles
Sydnor has noted that during the twenty years prior to the War of
Independence three-fourths of the 1600 justices of the peace appointed
in Virginia came from three hundred to four hundred families.[48]
Directly or indirectly, the justices of the county court influenced
the selection of all other county officers. The clerk of the court was
elected outright, but others--including the sheriff, coroner,
inspectors and commissioners for special duties, and militia officers
below the rank of brigadier--were commissioned by the governor from
lists submitted by the justices.
The office of clerk of the county court presumably dates from the
origin of the court itself, for references to clerk's fees are found
in the law as early as 1621,[49] and authority for appointment by the
governor is noted in 1642.[50] From the tables of fees authorized by
law, one may see that the clerk performed a wide range of functions
growing out of the work of the court. These included issuing orders
for all stages of court proceedings, taking depositions and
inventories, recording documents, and administering or probating
estates of all kinds. In addition, the county's records of births,
deaths and marriages were maintained from reports made to the clerk.
In time, some of the tasks of issuing certificates--such as marriage
licenses--which started as duties of the court were turned over to the
clerk to perform.[51]
Frequently the clerk could and did exercise great influence with the
justices in the handling of legal matters. As the members of the court
were laymen, it often occurred that the clerk was the only person who
was learned in the law, and his advice must have been a determining
factor in many situations. His tenure in office also strengthened his
position of influence, for it was customary to retain clerks in office
for long periods of time, during which they had daily contact with the
workings of the law and events in the county. Unlike the justices, who
came from all parts of the county and seldom were present except on
court days, the clerk was much more available at the courthouse, and
so generally was the first to hear news from the colonial capital or
the outside world. As a result, the clerks of the court were consulted
on a variety of matters whenever a justice was not available.
Fees charged for performing the various services connected with the
work of the court made up the income of the clerk, and occasionally
the same person might hold the positions of clerk and surveyor,
notary, or special commissioner. Under certain circumstances, clerks
also could practice law, and all of these sources combined to produce
an income which was for the times comfortable.
In the eighteenth century, two significant changes in the law
prescribing the clerk's office occurred--it was made a salaried
position, and the county court was given full authority to appoint the
clerk--but in other respects the office was changed very little either
by the passage of time or the transformation from colony to
commonwealth.
Ranking roughly equal to the clerk in importance to the operations of
county government was the sheriff. The office of sheriff appeared when
counties began to be established in the 1630's; and until after the
War of Independence, sheriffs were appointed by the governor on
recommendation of the county court. Almost from the beginning, too,
it appears to have been customary to appoint deputies or
"under-sheriffs". So it is not surprising to find that after 1661 it
was customary for the office of the sheriff to rotate annually among
the members of the court who, in turn, appointed their deputies
directly. But in the eighteenth century this system proved too
disruptive, and deputies were retained throughout several terms of
sheriff's appointments.[52]
From the beginning the sheriff and his deputies were compensated by
fees which they collected for a wide variety of duties. These ranged
from tasks connected with execution of the court's orders in criminal
cases, to enforcement of the law and administration of the jail. In
addition, the sheriff was due a fee from a master whose runaway
servant or employee he apprehended and returned, or for collecting
private debts or administering corporal punishment to servants for
their owners.[53]
Sheriffs also collected the levies which financed county government.
However, being subject to the pressures of their own circumstances,
there often was a tendency to give first priority to activities which
brought in their own fees. This led the General Assembly to require
that sheriffs collect public levies before they take any fees for
themselves, and to prescribe a number of other rules for improvement
of the conduct of their offices.[55]
The role of the sheriff in the tax collection process always was a
difficult one. The procedure for financing the county, initially, was
for the justices simply to compile lists of their expenses and the
freeholders of the county, compute how much was needed from each
freeholder to cover the cost of government, and direct the sheriff to
collect it. When the sheriff made his return to the court he was
entitled to deduct a percentage as his commission.[56] However,
revenue was often not collected, either because the job was farmed out
to others who defaulted, or the county was too poor, or its residents
were scattered and could not be found.[57] These problems ultimately
led the General Assembly to establish other officers whose exclusive
duties were the levying and collecting of revenue, but throughout the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the sheriff performed a central
role in the revenue process.
The sheriff was also the custodian of the county jail and its
prisoners. He had the authority to decide on and collect bail, and he
was liable for a fine if a prisoner escaped. He appears generally to
have taken his responsibility for the county jail lightly, for there
is evidence of widespread contracting for others to provide the guard
for the jail and the food for the prisoners. Other officials who were
part of the colonial county government performed specialized
functions, but unlike the clerk and sheriff, took no part in the
general administration of county business.
The office of county surveyor was created early in the seventeenth
century to meet the obvious need for accurate measurement and
recording of land. Initially, the surveyor was appointed by the county
court, and sometimes treated as an additional duty of the clerk or
sheriff. However, by the end of the eighteenth century a significant
change had occurred in the legislation which called for appointment by
the governor after a candidate had been examined and approved by the
faculty of the College of William & Mary. By 1783, therefore, the
surveyor became the first county official to be required to show
professional competence as a condition of appointment.[58]
The office of constable appeared in 1645, and may be described as
similar to that of sheriff, except that it served the court of a
single justice.[59] Constables were appointed by the justices of the
county court and served in precincts delineated by the justices.
The function of coroner in colonial Virginia was similar in all
essential respects to that in England at that time, that is, to
represent the Crown by investigating the circumstances of unexplained
deaths. Originally, this function was performed by the justices,
acting without fee. However, by the 1670's, coroners were being
appointed by the governor, and authorized to collect fees for their
services from the estate of the deceased or, lacking that, from the
county. In the absence of the sheriff, the coroner could be designated
by the court to perform the duties of the sheriff's office.[60]
Roughly a century after the appearance of the coroner, the next
significant addition to the machinery of county government came with
the creation of the commissioners of the tax. Forced by the increased
military expenses of the 1760's and 1770's[61] to find new sources of
revenue, Virginia created an official to take over the specialized
function of assessment of property for tax purposes. He was elected by
the freeholders of the county. In office, his task became one of
laying off the county into districts, assessing property, and
notifying the owner of the tax due.
The commissioners of the tax were created in 1777, and lasted until
1782 when a new official, the commissioner of the revenue was
established.[62] The new commissioner took responsibility for making
assessments of taxable property under a simplified procedure, and the
office has remained as a unique feature of Virginia's local government
to the present time.
_Court Days_
As the institution of the county court grew during the seventeenth and
eighteenth centuries and became the hub of county government, the
monthly sessions of the court furnished an opportunity for general
gatherings of the county's residents and visitors to transact both
public and personal business. A scene that must have been typical of
almost any Virginia county in the early nineteenth century has been
described by historian John Wayland as follows:
Court day once a month was looked upon as a great event; everyone
that could leave home was at hand. It was a day of great interest;
farmers coming in with their produce, such as butter and eggs, and
other articles which they exchanged for groceries and dry goods.
The streets around the courthouse were thronged with all sorts of
men; others, on horseback, riding up and down trying to sell their
horses. Men in home made clothes, old rusty hats that had seen
several generations, coarse shoes and no stockings, some without
coat or vest, with only shirt and pants....
This was a day to settle old grudges. When a man got too much
whiskey he was very quarrelsome and wanted to fight.... It was,
also, a great day for the gingerbread and molasses beer. The cake
sellers had [tables] in front of the courthouse, spread with white
cloths, with cakes piled high upon them and with kegs of beer
nearby. I have seen the jurymen let down hats from the windows
above, get them filled with gingerbread and a jug of beer sent up
by rope. About four or five o'clock the crowd began to start for
home.[63]
For anyone who had business with the court, whether he or she came as
a petitioner or a penitent, the justices, clerk, sheriff, and other
officials represented the presence of power and authority as colonial
Virginia knew it. But it was a presence in which men stood on little
ceremony or formality with each other. Except in unusual circumstances
all were likely to be laymen, for in colonial Virginia there was
little formal education in the professions and, at most, one might
have attended lectures at the College of William & Mary or a school in
England. If the gentlemen justices were widely read in history,
philosophy, government and literature--as well they might be--these
advantages of their means and leisure did not destroy their
appreciation for the issues they were asked to decide. For in their
own right they were planters who had to face and deal with these
issues in their own lives. Accordingly, their decisions, as reflected
in the minutes of their sessions, were based on this realism which
comes from personal experience.
Yet it remained true that the gentlemen justices of the county court
were, for most practical purposes, beyond any control of the community
they governed. Any complaint about the manner in which the justices
conducted their business could only be directed to the governor.[64]
Should the court cease to function for long periods of time because of
quarreling among the justices, or should the occurrence of an
emergency require replacement of justices, the freeholders of the
county had no method of dealing with their problem except through the
pressure of public opinion.[65]
Even with the best of good will among the members of the court, they
could not escape the usual difficulties of handling legal matters
before a bench of lay judges, who not only lacked professional
training, but were handicapped by the scarcity and cost of law
books.[66] Decisions which seemed wrong could, from earliest colonial
times, be appealed to the governor and General Court. Later the
establishment of District Courts, and their successors the Circuit
Courts, provided an intermediate tribunal for determining matters
which turned on points of law. But the business of the gentlemen
justices on court days was a mix of legal and administrative matters,
and in the latter area of activity there was no appeal.
_Election Days_
Among the non-judicial activities carried on at the courthouse, none
was as colorful and few were more important than elections of members
of the House of Burgesses. Elections were ordered by writs issued by
the governor, and in each county they were conducted by the sheriff.
Unless reasons of the greatest gravity prevented it, the polling place
was the county courthouse.[67]
Voting, or "taking the poll" as it was called, was conducted in the
court chambers, or, in warm weather, in the courthouse yard, with the
sheriff presiding at a long table. On either side of the sheriff were
justices of the court, and at the ends of the table were the
candidates and their tally clerks.
The sheriff opened the election by reading the governor's writ and
proclaiming the polls open. If there was no contest or a clearly
one-sided election, the sheriff might take the vote "on view"--that
is, by a show of hands of those assembled at the courthouse.
Generally, however, a poll of the individual voters was taken. As the
polling went on, each freeholder came before the sheriff when his name
was called and was asked by the sheriff how he voted. As he answered,
the tally clerk for the candidate receiving the vote enrolled it and
the candidate, in his turn, generally acknowledged the vote with a bow
and expression of appreciation. At the close of the polling a
comparison of the tally sheets showed the winner.
This method of voting enhanced the excitement of a close election,
and, since elections frequently were held on court days when many
people came to the courthouse on other business, activity outside the
courthouse sometimes was spirited. Wagers were offered and taken,
arguments broke out and fights sometimes followed.[68]
Those attending the elections usually were in good spirits, for they
were aided by the custom of the candidates to provide cider, rum
punch, ginger cakes, and, generally, a barbecued bullock or pigs for
picnic-style refreshment of the voters waiting at the courthouse.[69]
The candidates and their friends also kept open house for voters
traveling to the courthouse on election day, offering bed and
breakfast to as many as came. On election night, the winning
candidates customarily provided supper and a ball for their friends
and other celebrants.[70] The law was explicit that no one should
directly or indirectly give "money, meat, drink, present, gift, reward
or entertainment ... in order to be elected, or for being elected to
serve in the General Assembly",[71] but the practice of treating the
voters on election day was deeply rooted in Virginia's political
tradition. Thus the law was interpreted as only prohibiting one
offering refreshment "in order to get elected"--something extremely
difficult to prove--but not preventing one from treating his friends.
So, while occasionally voices were heard to condemn candidates for
"swilling the planters with bumbo",[72] or bemoan the "corrupting
influence of spiritous liquors, and other treats ... inconsistent with
the purity of moral and republican principles", the complainants
almost always turned out to be candidates who themselves had recently
been rejected at the polls.[73]
_The Transition From Colony to Commonwealth_
The War of Independence caused little change in Virginia's system of
county government. The county court system was carried over into the
state constitution of 1776 with only the oath of office changed to
call for support and defense of the constitution and government of the
Commonwealth of Virginia.[74] The General Assembly became the
successor to most of the functions of the colonial House of Burgesses
and Governor in Council, but significantly the principle of the
separation of powers established for the commonwealth was not extended
to the counties. Thus, the mix of powers, privileges and duties which
comprised the authority of the gentlemen justices in colonial times
was continued, as was the custom of appointment for life.
How little the transition from colony to commonwealth changed the
justices' own view of their position was illustrated in 1785 when the
new governor issued new commissions reappointing the justices of
Fairfax County's court. The justices refused to accept the new
commissions, and pointed out to the governor in a long letter that
this duplication of oaths would set a bad precedent and risk giving
the executive undue powers over the court. Far from being an
artificial objection, the letter noted, this latter point was
extremely touchy for the justices' standing in a great many matters
was based on seniority, and both the prestige and chances for
financial rewards that went with the office depended on this
standing.[75]
The most noteworthy changes in the organization of local functions
came as a result of the disestablishment of the Church of England.
That portion of all local officials' oaths which called for supporting
and defending the church was dropped, but, more important, abolition
of the parish vestry made it necessary to lodge its non-religious
functions elsewhere. In 1780, therefore, the General Assembly created
county boards of Overseers of the Poor.[76] Most other welfare
activities were added to the responsibilities of the county court.[77]
While the basic philosophy of Virginians regarding their local
government did not change as a result of independence, certain new
governmental institutions were created because colonial ways were not
efficient enough to meet the demands placed on them by social and
economic growth. Although the general jurisdiction of the county court
was continued, in 1788 a new court, called the district court, was
established to relieve the pressure of judicial business.[78] These
district courts were the direct antecedents of the present circuit
courts of the counties which were created by the General Assembly in
1818.[79]
If the district court did not displace the county court immediately,
it forecast its eventual decline as a judicial tribunal. The new court
introduced the beginnings of professionalism on the bench, and offered
the prospect of full-time attention to the administration of justice
by trained judges. Establishment of the office of the Commonwealth
Attorney in 1788 added to this trend toward professionalism.[80]
Most of the administrative duties of the county court in colonial
times remained after independence. Consequently, the records of the
county court continued to show actions connected with the licensing of
inns, ordinaries, mills, ferries, peddlers, and other similar
activities, along with attention to the survey and maintenance of
roads, bridges, and fords.[81] Regulatory powers over the practices of
tradesmen and artisans was broad, and used by the county court to set
rates which could be charged and to prescribe trade practices which
affected the quality of the products involved.
In this area of activity, the county court was performing what
Virginians generally regarded as matters of purely local concern.
Except in connection with the production of tobacco and milling and
shipping of grain, economic activities seldom affected anyone beyond
the county neighborhood.[82] Therefore, the county court was deemed to
be the best body to understand and accommodate the interests involved.
This attitude began to change only as the improvement of
transportation facilities increased travel and commerce in the period
from 1830 to 1860.
NOTES FOR CHAPTER III
[43] See generally, Martha Hiden, _How Justice Grew: Virginia
Counties: An Abstract of Their Formation_, (Williamsburg: Virginia
350th Anniversary Celebration, 1957). Also, because time-honored
tradition as well as law influenced the organization of Virginia
counties, the description of English local government in J. B. Black,
_The Reign of Elizabeth, 1558-1603_, (Oxford: Oxford University,
1936), pp. 174-177, applies to Virginia's county government in the
colonial and early federal periods.
[44] The first statute on this subject, in 1628, used the term
"commissioners" (I Hening, _Statutes_, 133). In 1662, this term was
replaced by "justices". P. A. Bruce, _Institutional History of
Virginia in the Seventeenth Century_, (New York: Putnam, 1910), I,
488. However, Porter, _County Government_, p. 170, states that
"justice of the peace" was the full title during most of the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.
[45] Porter, _County Government_, p. 168.
[46] In 1657, for example, the House of Burgesses enacted legislation
requiring that appointments be recommended by the county court and
approved by the Assembly. (I Hening, _Statutes_, 402, 480) But this
requirement appears to have been repealed after the restoration of
Charles II.
[47] Porter, _County Government_, p. 49, cites the _Calendar of State
Papers_, I, 261, listing the numbers of justices in nearby counties as
follows: Fauquier, 18; Prince William, 18; Loudoun, 17.
[48] Charles Sydnor, _American Revolutionaries In The Making_, (New
York: Collier, 1962), p. 64.
[49] Hening, _Statutes_, I, 117.
[50] Hening, _Statutes_, I, 305.
[51] Hening, _Statutes_, II, 28, 280.
[52] Porter, _County Government_, p. 42.
[53] _Ibid._, pp. 27-28.
[54] Hening, _Statutes_, I, 330, 484.
[55] These rules included prohibitions against extortion of excessive
fees, acting as lawyers in their own courts, falsifying revenue
returns, multiple job-holding and the like. See Hening, _Statutes_, I,
265, 297, 330, 333, 465, 523; II, 163, 291. Porter, _County
Government_, 68, comments that "the office of sheriff, judging from
the number of acts which the assembly found it necessary to pass, was
the problem child of ... [the 18th century], not only in regard to the
duties of the office, but also in the method of appointment."
[56] Shepherd, _Laws of Virginia_, I, 367.
[57] _Calendar of State Papers_, IV, 416.
[58] Hening, _Statutes_, XI, 352.
[59] Hening, _Statutes_, IV, 350.
[60] Hening, _Statutes_, II, 419; IV, 350.
[61] Hening, _Statutes_, IX, 351.
[62] Hening, _Statutes_, XII, 243.
[63] John Wayland, _History of Rockingham County, Virginia_, (Dayton,
Virginia: Ruebush-Elkins, 1912), pp. 424-425.
[64] Porter, _County Government_, p. 109, citing _Calendar of State
Papers_, IV, 170.
[65] Sydnor, _American Revolutionaries_, pp. 77-78.
[66] As a result law books were the property of the court rather than
the individual justices, and on the death or resignation of a justice
his law books were surrendered to the court and divided among the
remaining members of the court. Hening, _Statutes_, IV, 437.
[67] In unusual circumstances, such as an outbreak of smallpox, the
sheriff might chose an alternate site. H. R. McIlwaine (ed), _Journals
of the House of Burgesses, 1742-49_, (Richmond, 1909), p. 292.
[68] Douglas S. Freeman, _George Washington: A Biography: Young
Washington_, (New York: Scribner, 1948), II, 146, notes that
Washington became involved in an election-day brawl at the election of
members of the House of Burgesses in December 1755. The contest
between John West, George William Fairfax, and William Ellzey was very
close, and Washington (supporting Fairfax) met William Payne (who
opposed Fairfax). Angry words led to blows, and Payne knocked
Washington down with a stick. There was talk of a duel, but the next
day Washington apologized for what he had said, and friendly relations
were restored.
[69] Sydnor, _American Revolutionaries_, p. 53.
[70] Nicholas Cresswell, _The Journals of Nicholas Cresswell,
1774-1777_, (Pt. Washington, N. Y.: Kennikat Press, 1968), pp. 27-28.
[71] Hening, _Statutes_, III, 243.
[72] "Bumbo" was an eighteenth century slang term for rum. Sydnor,
_American Revolutionaries_, p. 53.
[73] William C. Rives, _History of the Life and Times of James
Madison_, (Boston: Little, Brown, 1873), I, 180-81.
[74] Porter, _County Government_, p. 107.
[75] Calendar of State Papers, IV, 337.
[76] Hening, _Statutes_, X, 198; XI, 432; XII, 273, 573; Shepherd,
_Laws_, I, 114.
[77] Hening, _Statutes_, X, 385 (orphans); XII, 199 (mental health).
[78] The district court's jurisdiction included civil cases of a value
of £30 or 2,000 lbs of tobacco, all criminal cases, and appeals from
the county court in criminal cases. Hening, _Statutes_, XII, 730 et
seq.
[79] Virginia, _Code of 1819_, I, 226.
[80] Hening, _Statutes_, XIII, 758.
[81] Hening, _Statutes_, XII, 174.
[82] In the late eighteenth century, Virginia millers and warehousemen
were major sources of grain and flour for New England, the West Indies
and Mediterranean. The House of Burgesses, and later the General
Assembly, enacted comprehensive laws regulating the quality, grading
and marking of these products. See, Lloyd Payne, _The Miller in
Eighteenth Century Virginia_, (Williamsburg: Colonial Williamsburg,
1963) and Charles Kuhlman, _The Development of the Flour-Milling
Industry in the United States_, (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1929), pp.
27-33, 47-54.
[Illustration: Fairfax County Courthouse, June 1863. Photo by T. H.
O'Sullivan. Copy from the Library of Congress.]
CHAPTER IV
THE WAR YEARS: 1861-1865
As events in the winter of 1860 and the spring of 1861 carried the
nation into the crisis of civil war, Fairfax County aligned itself
with Richmond rather than Washington. Thus, at the State's convention
on secession in May 1861, the Fairfax County delegation voted to
ratify the secession ordinance.[83] The consequences of this action
were prompt in coming and far-reaching in their effects, for with the
commencement of military operations in Northern Virginia it became
impossible to carry on the normal processes of county government.
Fairfax Court House (the Town of Providence) was outside the ring of
fortifications which were built on the Virginia side of the Potomac to
protect the National Capital. Inside this line, stretching in a great
arc from Alexandria, through the vicinity of The Falls Church, to
Chain Bridge, Union Army commanders exercised military authority and
administered justice through provost courts.[84] Outside this area the
authority of the General Assembly of Virginia nominally remained in
effect, and the justices of the courts and the sheriffs of the county
continued to hold their positions under the laws of the seceded state.
Serious difficulties in the transaction of public business soon
appeared throughout Fairfax County, where patrolling and skirmishing
outside the ring of permanent fortified positions were daily
occurrences. This was recognized in an ordinance adopted by the
Secession Convention providing that when the court of any county
failed to meet for the transaction of business or the public was
prevented from attending the court "by reason of the public enemy",
the court of the adjoining county where such obstructions did not
exist had jurisdiction of all matters referrable to the court or the
clerk of the court where normal business had ceased.[85]
As Virginia armed, troops of the Confederacy placed themselves in
positions to repel invaders, and in May 1861, a company of the
Warrenton Rifles established a camp at Fairfax Court House. On the
morning of June 1, 1861, a body of Union cavalry rode through the
town, and in the confused exchange of fire which followed, a Captain
of the Rifles, John Quincy Marr, became the first officer casualty of
the war.[86]
A month later, the tide of Union forces under McDowell swept past the
courthouse on the way to its rendezvous at Bull Run, and back again to
the safety of the fortified positions along the Potomac. In the wake
of their victory at Bull Run, troops of the Confederacy established an
outpost at Fairfax Court House to watch for signs that the Union Army
might resume the offensive by moving against the Confederate
earthworks near Centreville.
This outpost did not see any fighting for the time being, but it
provided the site for what later was regarded as one of the decisive
moments of the war. In September 1861, General Beauregard had
established his headquarters at Fairfax Court House, and urgently
pressed the newly-formed government of Confederate President Jefferson
Davis for reinforcements with which to sweep into Pennsylvania and
Maryland and, hopefully, to carry the Federal capital itself. A
meeting was arranged at Beauregard's headquarters in which Davis,
Generals Beauregard and J. J. Johnston, and certain of their trusted
staff officers considered this plan. Their decision was to adopt a
defensive posture and protect the borders of Virginia rather than take
the offensive and invade the North. As events turned out, this
decision had consequences of the greatest effect, for it was not until
Lee marched out of the Valley on the road to Gettysburg in 1863 that
there was another opportunity for the Confederacy to carry the war to
the soil of the northern states.[87]
In the spring of 1862, the Confederate army retired from Fairfax Court
House, and soon after that its line of fortifications at
Centreville--the most extensive system of field fortifications in
military history up to that time--was abandoned. As the Union armies
took the initiative in their repeated efforts to reach Richmond, the
crossroads at Fairfax Court House had key importance in the
communication and supply systems of these forces.
From 1862 to the end of the war, Union troops remained in control of
the crossroads and the courthouse. Contemporary photographs of the
building show it being used as a lookout point and station for
patrols. Other descriptions indicate that the courthouse was
loopholed,[88] the furnishings were removed, and the interior
generally was gutted so that only the walls and roof remained.[89] For
all practical purposes, the courthouse and its related buildings were,
in the years 1863 and 1864, a military outpost and minor headquarters
in the Union army's system to protect its supply and communications
lines from the irregular troops who kept hostilities constantly
smoldering in Northern Virginia. Throughout the western part of
Fairfax County, and in Loudoun, Fauquier and Prince William Counties,
lived many who gave the appearance of innocent farmers during the
daylight hours, but who changed into Confederate uniforms at night and
on weekends to ride against isolated outposts or supply points of the
Union army or destroy vulnerable bridges and communications centers.
The operations of these guerilla bands kept thousands of Union troops
pinned down on rear area security guard duty, and preoccupied the
forces assigned to Fairfax Court House. The difficulty of their task
under the circumstances that prevailed in Northern Virginia was
dramatized in the famous Confederate raid on Fairfax Court House by
men under the command of Col. John S. Mosby when, on the night of
March 8, 1863, the Confederate commander with about 30 men captured
and carried off 33 prisoners, including Union Brigadier General Edwin
H. Stoughton, and a large number of horses and quantity of supplies.
Throughout 1863, 1864 and the spring of 1865 hardly a night went by
without some cries of alarm and shots being fired because of the
activities of the Confederate irregulars. Yet they took a substantial
toll from the wealth and welfare of the very people they claimed to
represent, for the Union troops soon learned more efficiency in their
rear area operations, and increased the restrictions on movement of
civilian traffic. The transaction of personal business in normal ways
became virtually impossible. The historian, Bruce Catton, has assessed
the activities of the guerilla bands as follows:
The quality of these bands varied greatly. At the top was John S.
Mosby's courageous soldiers led by a minor genius, highly
effective in partisan warfare. Most of the groups, however, were
about one degree better than plain outlaws, living for loot and
excitement, doing no actual fighting if they could help it, and
offering a secure refuge to any number of Confederate deserters
and draft evaders.... The worst damage which this system did to
the Confederacy, however, was that it put Yankee soldiers in a
mood to be vengeful.[90]
During the years when normal business at the courthouse was suspended
and the county officials who held authority from the General Assembly
were dispersed, some of the county's records were removed from the
courthouse for safekeeping, and some were not.[91] In either case they
were subject to the risks of loss and damage. Some were carried off
and in later years have been brought to light as the descendents of
Union and Confederate soldiers have found them in places where they
had been put for safekeeping.
The jail building ceased to be used for its original purpose, and,
during the latter months of the war, the jail of Alexandria County
(now Arlington County) was utilized for Fairfax County's
prisoners.[92]
The effort to provide a legitimate successor to the secession
government in Richmond started in the Wheeling Conventions of May and
June 1861, from which came the Unionist government of Francis H.
Pierpont.[93] The admission of West Virginia to the Union in December
1862[94] left Governor Pierpont in control of only those parts of
Northern Virginia, the Shenandoah Valley, and Chesapeake Bay that were
occupied by Federal troops. Within this area, the Pierpont
administration collected taxes and attempted to supply the essential
services of civilian government. Closer touch with these problems was
possible after June 1863, when Governor Pierpont moved his government
to Alexandria.
On January 19, 1863, a new County Court for Fairfax County was
convened pursuant to a proclamation by Governor Pierpont which
directed that the place for the court's sessions should be changed
from Fairfax Court House to the Village of West End[95] near
Alexandria. Here, in January 1863, the Court met in a structure known
as Bruin's Building. The minutes of this and other sessions which
followed recite many of the same problems and disputes that always had
occupied the time of county courts--dockets of minor criminal and
civil cases, petitions to higher levels of government, determination
of minor civil disputes, issuances of permits and licenses, and
appointment of public officials.[96]
Certain items in the minutes of this January 19, 1863 meeting
documented the strains created by the wartime conditions: a petition
to the Secretary of War prayed that the "Bruin Building" in the
Village of West End be placed at the court's disposal; the Deputy
Commissioner of Revenue was directed to discharge the duties of the
Commissioner until the latter, currently a prisoner in Richmond, could
return to his duties; payments were approved for wagonowners who had
hauled books, papers and records to the courthouse from various points
in Fairfax and nearby counties. One item of particular interest
stated:
The fact having been brought to the notice of the Court that
degradations were being committed upon the Mt. Vernon Estate, the
Court, under the Chancery powers vested therein, appointed
Jonathan Roberts, the present Sheriff, Curator, to take charge of
all property in Fairfax County, Va. belonging to the heirs of
John A. Washington, dec.[97]
After the cessation of fighting in April 1865, Governor Pierpont moved
his government from Alexandria to Richmond. However, without the
presidential support which Lincoln had provided during his lifetime,
the Pierpont administration found it increasingly difficult to carry
on effective government as the years immediately after the war saw
numerous plans for reconstruction competing for favor. The situation
was further complicated by the fact that in February 1864 the Pierpont
administration had sponsored a constitutional convention which had
adopted a new constitution for Virginia, and that this constitution
had nominally gone into effect in Alexandria and Fairfax counties.[98]
A complex legal problem regarding the succession of governmental
authority thus was added to the formidable task of reconstructing
Fairfax County's economy and physical facilities.
This task was made difficult because many of the records of the County
had been scattered or destroyed during the fighting. Records were
searched out and retrieved whenever their places of safekeeping were
known, a process requiring years of effort. Some record books were
never found. The accounts of how the wills of George and Martha
Washington were recovered are frequently cited to illustrate the
difficulties of reassembling Fairfax County's records.
When, in the fall of 1861, Beauregard's Confederate troops withdrew
from Fairfax County, the will of George Washington was secretly
removed from the courthouse by the court clerk, Alfred Moss, and taken
to Richmond. Here it was placed for safekeeping with the Secretary of
the Commonwealth of Virginia. Following the cessation of hostilities,
it was returned to Fairfax County.[99]
Martha Washington's will was not removed from the courthouse to
Richmond, but remained there during the time Union troops occupied the
building as a patrol point. As might be expected, cabinets were broken
open and papers scattered. One day, late in 1862, a troop of soldiers
from New England was in the building and engaged in shoveling out the
debris from the floor. A Union lieutenant named Thompson grew curious
about these papers and interrupted the work long enough to examine
some of them. He picked up the will of Martha Washington and,
recognizing it, took it with him. Following the war, the will next was
heard of in 1903 in England where a descendant of Lt. Thompson sold
it to J. P. Morgan. The sale was reported to the Commonwealth Attorney
of Fairfax County who wrote Mr. Morgan seeking the return of the will,
but no answer was ever received. After Mr. Morgan's death, the County
sought to obtain the will from his son. Negotiations were unsuccessful
until court action was begun by the County. Finally, one day before
the matter was to be argued before the United States Supreme Court,
the will was returned.[100]
NOTES FOR CHAPTER IV
[83] Thomas Chapman, Jr., "The Secession Election in Fairfax County,
May 23, 1861", _Yearbook of the Historical Society of Fairfax County_,
IV (1955) 50.
[84] Robert Anderson, "The Administration of Justice in the Counties
of Fairfax, Alexandria (Arlington) and the City of Alexandria (Part
II)", _The Arlington Historical Magazine_, II (October 1962) 10-11.
[85] Ordinance 67, passed by the Virginia Convention, 26 June, 1861,
cited by Anderson, "Administration of Justice", p. 10.
[86] Governor William Smith, "The Skirmish at Fairfax Court House",
_The Fairfax County Centennial Commission_, (Vienna, Virginia: 1961)
p. 4. Because of the confusion in the Confederate ranks, no officer
took charge, and so Governor Smith ordered the Confederate troops to
return the fire of the Federal soldiers.
[87] The Fairfax Court House meeting, which took place in Gen.
Beauregard's headquarters near the courthouse, has been the subject of
controversy in the memoirs of those involved. See, for example,
Jefferson Davis, _The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government_,
(New York: Yoseloff, 1958), I, 368, 448-452, 464; Alfred Roman,
_Military Operations of Gen. Beauregard_, (New York: Harper & Bros.,
1884), I, 137-139.
[88] _Washington Post_, April 10, 1921.
[89] _Alexandria Gazette_ and _Fairfax News_, October 17, 1862.
[90] Bruce Catton, _A Stillness at Appomatox_, (New York: Cardinal
Giant Edition, Pocket Books, Inc., 1958), pp. 318-319.
[91] Two items from the _Alexandria Gazette_ in July 1862 illustrate
the problems regarding these records. The edition of July 12, 1862
printed a letter to the newspaper stating that records of Fairfax
County had lately been found in Warrenton, having been removed there,
it was supposed, by lawyers. The new sheriff of the County took
possession of these records. The edition of July 23, 1862 reported
that the new County Court of Fairfax held its July term in the Clerk's
office, the courthouse not being in condition for that purpose, and
that one of the court's actions was to order that application be made
for a new seal, the old one not being found.
[92] Fairfax County Court Minute Book, 1863-1867, p. 130. This order
was entered November 25, 1864, and was rescinded by a subsequent order
entered November 22, 1865. Minute Book, 1863-1867, p. 289.
[93] The Unionists in northern and western Virginia met twice in
conventions held at Wheeling. In May 1861 a convention of some 400
so-called delegates from the counties in these regions met to consider
their stake in the State's constitutional crisis, but took no action
since Virginia had not yet ratified the secession ordinance. A second
convention at Wheeling was held in June 1861, and organized a Unionist
government for the State which claimed the authority of the General
Assembly (which it asserted had forfeited its authority by rebellion)
and other constitutional officials. Francis H. Pierpont served as
governor of this Unionist government of Virginia.
[94] The Congressional approval of West Virginia's admission occurred
in December 1862, but it was not until June 1863 that President
Lincoln proclaimed the admission of the new State and approval of its
constitution.
[95] Fairfax County Court Minute Book, 1863-1867, p. 2.
[96] _Ibid._ Minutes of a meeting of the court on January 19, 1863.
[97] _Ibid._ The practical effect of this order has been questioned,
however, since Mt. Vernon was sold out of the Washington family in
1859 to the Mt. Vernon Ladies' Association of the Union, and the
Washingtons had, by 1863, moved to Fauquier County, leaving neither
relatives or property in Fairfax County. Interview with Judge James
Keith, April 1972.
[98] As described in William Hemphill, Marvin Schlegel and Sadie
Engelberg, _Cavalier Commonwealth: History and Government of
Virginia_, (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1957), 339-340, this constitution
contained various new provisions, such as the abolition of slavery and
denial of suffrage to all men who held office under a Confederate
government.
[99] Eugene E. Prussing, _The Estate of George Washington, Deceased_,
(Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1927) pp. 39-40. "Martha Washington's
Will and the Story of its Loss and Recovery by Fairfax County,"
_Yearbook of the Historical Society of Fairfax County, Virginia_, II
(1952-53) 40-62.
[100] "Martha Washington's Will," p. 61.
CHAPTER V
THE YEARS OF REBUILDING: 1865-1903
With the end of the war the formidable tasks of rebuilding both state
and local governments were begun. President Abraham Lincoln's view of
reconstruction had been that the government which took Virginia out of
the Union should be the one to bring her back into the Union,[101] and
President Andrew Johnson generally sought to follow this principle.
Others, mainly the Radical Republican leaders, argued that Virginia
had forfeited her sovereignty by rebellion, and so could not return to
the Union except on new terms.[102] In this respect, President Johnson
found that the presence of Governor Pierpont in Richmond--purporting
to govern under the constitution which his government had drafted and
ratified in Alexandria in 1864--was a complicating factor. Not only
was the legitimacy of this constitution questioned, but all evidence
pointed to the conclusion that the state's leaders who had served the
Confederacy could not and would not accept it.
An unsuccessful attempt to improve the constitution was made in the
summer of 1865, and thereafter a series of confusing elections and
administrations followed as the Radical Republican leaders in Congress
overrode President Johnson's reconstruction program.[103] In March
1867, the territory of nine former Confederate states was divided into
five military districts, in which army commanders were authorized to
oversee the civil administrations of the states. In Virginia's
military district, the army commander, General John Schofield,
interfered very little with the administration of Francis Pierpont,
who served as Provisional Governor. Pierpont provided a measure of
needed stability compared to what had preceded it, and as a result
slow but steady progress was made toward reconstituting some of the
essential elements of local government in the state.[104]
The prospect of restoration of full political power to the states
appeared briefly in March 1867 when Congress provided that the
Confederate states would be readmitted to the Union and their
delegations would be seated in Congress when they adopted
constitutions which conformed to the Constitution of the United States
with the new Fourteenth Amendment. A convention, dominated largely by
Republican reconstructionists, met in December 1867 and brought forth
the so-called "Underwood Constitution," named for Judge John Underwood
who presided at the convention.
The proposed new constitution contained the main features which were
needed to secure reinstatement of Virginia's sovereignty. In addition,
however, it contained a controversial provision which, in effect,
disenfranchised thousands who had served the Confederacy. Thus, the
choice offered in the impending ratification referendum was difficult
for most Virginians. So controversial was this matter that the army
commander was moved to intervene and postpone the referendum
indefinitely.[105] Stalemate followed during 1868 and 1869. Francis
Pierpont was replaced in the office of Provisional Governor by Henry
Horatio Wells, a New Yorker who was favored by the Radical
Republicans. Progress toward reconstitution of local government lost
momentum as state leadership lapsed.
Intervention by President Grant finally brought action on the
Underwood Constitution by proposing that Virginians vote on the
controversial disenfranchisement clauses separate from the main
features of the document. In July 1869, the vote was taken, with the
expected result that the "test oath" provision was defeated while the
constitution was approved. In the General Assembly elected under this
constitution, the Conservative Party enjoyed a working majority over
the Republicans, who had been badly split by the referendum
controversy. Henry Wells resigned, and was replaced by Gilbert Walker,
who served first by appointment of the army commander and later by
virtue of election to a constitutional four-year term. In January
1870, legislators from Virginia resumed their seats in the Congress,
and the last Federal occupation troops left the State.
The Underwood Constitution introduced major changes into the structure
of local government.[106] It adopted the Northern system of dividing
counties into townships,[107] with a justice of the peace exercising
his authority only within his township. Other elective offices
introduced at this time were county supervisors, a county clerk,
collector, assessor, overseer of the poor, and overseer of roads. All
these officials--some serving the township and others the county--were
salaried, and greatly increased the size of the governmental apparatus
formerly centered in the county court. The Board of county supervisors
was the general governing body of the county, comprised of members
elected from each township.
Although this expansion of the structure of county government came in
response to recognition that problems of the 1870's could not be
solved with government geared to the 1770's, the impact of these
problems plus Virginians' conservative political tradition led to
dissatisfaction with the township system from its inception. As soon
as the original force of the reconstruction movement was spent,
therefore, this system was modified to bring it more into line with
Virginia's historic governmental institutions. In 1875 and 1884 the
number of separate elective offices was decreased, the independent
powers of the townships were reduced, and the townships were converted
into "magisterial districts."[108] Gradually the power to appoint all
county officers except those with constitutional status was given to
the board of county supervisors and the county's Circuit Court judge.
[Illustration: Map of Fairfax Court House from G. M. Hopkins, _Atlas
of Fifteen Miles Around Washington_, 1879.]
The last quarter of the nineteenth century saw the appearance and
disappearance of a number of public offices now only dimly remembered.
For example, the county office of commissioner of roads dated from
1831, but the constitution of 1869 created township overseers of roads
who, with the commissioner of roads, formed the county road board.
When the townships were abolished, the duties of these boards were
transferred to the commissioner of roads and road surveyor. By 1900
this highly decentralized system had resulted in enactment of several
hundred local road laws by the states and led to a confused situation
that was not cured until the state highway system and highway
department were established in 1919.[109]
From the time of the disestablishment of the Church of England, care
of the County's poor and orphans had been the responsibility of the
County's overseer of the poor. Public health measures to suppress
smallpox also were carried on by this officer. The constitution of
1869 created a superintendent of the poor for each county, elected by
popular vote, and the overseers of the poor became township officers.
With the abolition of the townships, the superintendent of the poor
also disappeared and the overseers became officers of the magisterial
districts.[110]
In the early days of the nineteenth century, the justices of the
County Court had been responsible for the County's militia. This
system was changed in 1833 when the militia were reorganized to form
divisions, brigades and regiments on a state-wide basis. Officers were
appointed by the governor on recommendation of the county court. This
system continued until the Civil War, and when the militia was
established after the war it was managed entirely from the state
level.[111]
In the changes that followed the shift of governing power to the board
of county supervisors, one of the chief losers was the county sheriff.
He ceased to have any control of elections or revenue matters, and his
other powers and prerogatives connected with administrative functions
of county government were lost to others. He became exclusively a
peace officer and custodian of the county jail, and these are the
duties of his office today.
As the nineteenth century ended, Virginia moved toward another
constitutional convention--its fifth since 1776--with the hope of
modernizing the machinery of government. As matters turned out,
however, the resulting constitution of 1902 was not a forward-looking
document, and its chief results were to formalize changes which had
already occurred in practice. Thus, much debate was spent on how
voting qualifications should be regulated, and whether the old county
court should be abolished or not. Fairfax County's representatives in
the convention voted for retaining the county court, arguing that the
monthly sessions had significant social values--an "heirloom of great
psychological importance." Ultimately, however, the vote went against
retention of the county court and it was abolished. Its judicial
functions were assigned to the circuit court, and its legislative and
administrative functions were performed by the board of
supervisors.[112]
The disappearance of this political institution which had been the
focal point of Virginia's local government for almost 300 years,
marked the end of an era which reflected the tradition that public
affairs were best managed by the county's gentlemen freeholders. But
it did not immediately usher in as its successor an era of
professionalism and responsiveness to the wishes of the public.
Progress in these latter respects was postponed by slowness in
widening the suffrage and the opportunity to hold public office. In
this respect the Constitution of 1902 perpetuated the restrictive
system which had prevailed since 1875 by retaining the capitation tax
and the requirements of literacy and/or the ability to explain any
part of the constitution.
The beginning of the twentieth century also marked the end of the
rebuilding years which had followed the Civil War. The simple struggle
for subsistence, which had been the foremost theme when scarcities
existed in all types of goods and the sources of capital were meager,
no longer was the overriding consideration. A measure of normalcy had,
by 1902, returned to life in Northern Virginia. And if the pace of
this style of life was not as vigorous or spectacular as in some other
areas of the nation at that time, it offered, at least, the
substantial attractions of a comfortable and secure rural setting with
ready access to the centers of commerce and culture in nearby
Washington, Alexandria, and Georgetown.
NOTES FOR CHAPTER V
[101] Hemphill, et al., _Cavalier Commonwealth_, p. 346.
[102] Samuel E. Morison and Henry S. Commager, _The Growth of the
American Republic_, (New York: Oxford, 1937), II, 37-41.
[103] Porter, _County Government_, p. 241.
[104] Walter L. Fleming, _The Sequel of Appomatox_, (New Haven: Yale
University, 1921), pp. 146-147.
[105] Explaining his action to General Grant, then supreme commander
of all the military districts, General Schofield stated that the
members of the Underwood Convention "could only hope to obtain office
by disqualifying everybody in the State who is capable of discharging
official duties, and all else to them was of comparatively slight
importance. Even the question of whether their constitution will be
ratified or rejected they treat with indifference. Congress, they say,
will make it all right anyway." Hemphill, et al., _Cavalier
Commonwealth_, p. 352.
[106] See Porter, _County Government_, pp. 243-246, 258-259, 293.
[107] The introduction of the township was probably due to the fact
that a number of New Yorkers participated in the convention. Townships
had never been part of the tradition of Virginia's local government.
[108] Virginia, Laws of 1874-75, c. 270.
[109] Porter, _County Government_, pp. 249, 271; _Code of Virginia_
(1950 Edn.) Title 33, c. 1.
[110] Porter, _County Government_, pp. 258-59, 289.
[111] _Ibid._, p. 177.
[112] Ralph McDanel, _The Virginia Constitutional Convention of
1891-92_, (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1928), p. 103,
reports that R. Walton Moore was one of Fairfax County's delegation to
the convention, and that he argued strongly for the social values of
retaining the court. The motion to retain the monthly county court was
defeated, however, by a vote of 41 to 19.
[Illustration: The dedication of the Marr Monument in 1904. Copy by
Lee Hubbard.]
CHAPTER VI
THE TWENTIETH CENTURY COURTHOUSE
The twentieth century brought Fairfax County more than a new
constitutional framework; it brought a new outlook and spirit.
Something of this spirit was reflected in the following quotation from
a short history and prospectus of the County published by the County
Board of Supervisors in 1907:
Verily, Fairfax County, old in its history, and hoary in its
traditions, is throbbing with a new life and enterprise. Only
yesterday were her advantages and possibilities appreciated; yet,
today she is attracting settlers from all parts of the Union, and
even from foreign countries. Certainly no other section extends a
more cordial welcome and more attractive inducements to the
investor and home-seeker.[113]
If this statement seemed perhaps a bit too eager, it was at least
hopeful and optimistic in contrast to the spirit that had prevailed
during the long years of reconstruction. It expressed a feeling of
confidence that came from having weathered the depression which
followed the Panic of 1893 better than many parts of the country.[114]
[Illustration: "The Tavern," across Little River Turnpike from the
courthouse. Photo by Helen Hill Miller, 1932.]
[Illustration: The courthouse about 1907.]
One reason for this was Fairfax County's expanding contacts with the
city of Washington, chiefly by having become a supplier of its dairy
and truck garden produce, and by becoming the residential area for
increasing numbers of employees of the Federal governmental
establishment. These elements of the economy of Northern Virginia
offered more resistance to the depression of the 1890's than was
possible in the areas of south and central Virginia which depended on
cotton and tobacco.
In turn, it was the development of rapid railroad service, both steam
and electric, that made both of these developments possible at this
time. The critical importance of this transportation was recognized by
the County Supervisors' publication:
The eastern part of the county is in the immediate vicinity of the
cities of Washington and Alexandria; while all sections of it are
within a few hours' drive of these cities. In addition to the
accessibility of these cities by roadways, three steam and three
electric railways connect the county with Washington. The greatest
trunk lines north and south traverse Fairfax County. Through
trains on the Pennsylvania, Southern, Chesapeake and Ohio, Norfolk
and Western, Seaboard Air Line, and the Atlantic Coast Line, are
hourly passing through this county, affording convenient and
direct connection with all parts of the country. Every section of
the county is within easy reach of some one of these roads; and
with their double track facilities, and consequent excellent local
accommodations, great activity in suburban home building is
observed on every hand. Especially is this true along the lines of
the electric railways, where numerous villages are springing into
existence.
The proximity and accessibility to Washington, the most
magnificent city in the world, together with the splendid natural
advantages of Fairfax, must inevitably make the county rich,
populous and great.[115]
The heydays of the steam and electric railroads in Northern Virginia
were followed in the 1920's by improvement and expansion of the road
system.[116] As the number of automobiles increased--and their
prevalence was forecast by designation of present Lee Highway as the
initial segment of the first transcontinental highway running westward
from the zero milestone on the ellipse in Washington--the paving of
roads became a major concern of local communities. Both free public
highways and toll turnpikes built by subscription and bond issues were
undertaken in Fairfax County. Even after the County elected to turn
over its roadbuilding to the state under the Byrd Road Act in 1932,
the County's leaders continued to have a deep interest in the
increased population growth that roads and railroads made possible.
Increased population brought increased needs for various new public
services. Shortly after the first State Board of Health was
established in Virginia in 1900, the counties of the State established
local boards. The Chairman of the Board of County Supervisors
automatically became Chairman of the Health Board in this early
experiment in public health services.[117] The machinery for raising
revenue was made more efficient by redrawing the division of labor
between the commissioner of revenue and the county treasurer.
Most far-reaching in the long run, however, was the enactment in 1920
of state legislation giving counties the option of adopting various
managerial forms of government if they so desired. Fairfax County
exercised this option in 1951 by adopting the County Executive form of
government.[118]
Under this form of county government, the Board of Supervisors
remained the sole legislative authority of the County, but the
executive functions were placed under the supervision of a new
officer, the county executive. The county executive, as well as all
boards and commissions responsible for special services and
administrative functions, were appointed by the Board of Supervisors,
and served either for specified terms or at the pleasure of the Board.
The Supervisors continued to be elected by the County's voters, each
from one of the magisterial districts. This method of election was
adopted deliberately as a means of maintaining a balance of political
representation of the western and southern parts of the County, which
still were rural in their economic and social orientation, and the
north, east and central areas of the County, which had been
intensively developed as part of the suburbs of Washington and
Alexandria.
The involvement of the public in county government was seen in many
forms. Service on county boards and commissions was one. Also, as
newcomers poured into the county seeking homes, the neighborhoods and
communities formed civic organizations or citizens associations to
provide means for group action on problems of common concern. Parallel
to these groups, others, such as Parent-Teachers Associations, formed
to deal with school-related problems which were both inside and
outside the scope of governmental services in the field of education.
These forms of citizen involvement in public affairs--prompted partly
by the sheer size of the new demands for service and partly because
the newcomers to Fairfax County came from areas where wide
participation in local government was taken for granted--had a
profound effect on the County's historic outlook on public affairs. No
longer was it accepted that certain families or individuals held among
themselves the privileges, powers and obligations of governing. This
tradition, symbolized by the gentlemen justices of colonial times and
the nineteenth century, was replaced by a new system where political
leadership was established through service in the community and
verified by the ability to win in competition at the polls.
The new dimensions of government's role necessitated finding more
space for the county's offices. The clerk's office, which
historically had been the focal point for the County's continuing
administrative functions, ceased to be able to contain all the
County's offices as early as the 1920's. An additional building was
authorized, but delays in financing and construction postponed its
completion until 1934.[119] However, by 1940 this building was so
crowded that both its attic and basement had been converted to office
space, and many County agencies were using additional rented space in
non-County buildings.
Plans were developed in the early-1940's for a major addition to the
courthouse building. Delays were encountered, first because of the
shortages of materials and manpower during the years of World War II,
and then because of problems of funding this work amid other urgent
demands for tax revenue. Ultimately, both shortages were relieved, and
work was begun on the central block and south wing of the courthouse
as they appear today.[120] The jail section and wing containing the
clerk's records of land transactions and court proceedings were added
to the building in 1956.[121]
As the County's need for space to house its governmental offices
continued to grow through the 1960's, some consideration was given to
moving the courthouse to a new location.[122] The transformation of
Fairfax from a town into a city in 1961 added a complicating factor to
this issue for it meant that technically the County had no control
over the land on which its seat of government stood. The City of
Fairfax, however, was anxious to keep the center of County government
in its existing location, and offered to condemn sufficient land for
the County's building needs.[123]
The seat of county government remained at Fairfax, but the courthouse
square no longer sufficed to contain the complex of buildings
involved. By 1969 construction had been completed on a County
Governmental Center, later named the Massey Building, to honor Carlton
Massey, the first County Executive, who served from 1952 to 1971. A
separate building was erected nearby for the County Police Department,
and plans were made for other buildings in the future.[124]
[Illustration: Rear view of the Fairfax County courthouse complex.
Photo by the Office of Public Affairs, about 1972.]
[Illustration: View of the Fairfax County Courthouse, the Massey
Building, and downtown Fairfax. Photo by Bernie Boston, 1976.]
Overshadowing the old courthouse tract, the new center of government
nevertheless preserves the evidence of the past by continuing use of
the original (north) section of the courthouse building and its 1953
addition, all in an architectural style reminiscent of the colonial
period in Virginia. The presence of the past combine with a sense of
the present and the future to make the Fairfax County Courthouse both
a symbol and a functioning seat of a county government which in the
year 1976 had been in existence for more than two centuries.
NOTES FOR CHAPTER VI
[113] Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, _Industrial and Historical
Sketch of Fairfax County, Virginia_, (Fairfax: County Board of
Supervisors, 1907), p. 5.
[114] Allen W. Moger, "The Rebuilding of the Old Dominion,"
(Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, 1940), pp.
95-96.
[115] Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, _Industrial and Historical
Sketch_, pp. 5-6.
[116] The campaign to improve Virginia's roads had been waged since
the 1890's. See, for example, the rhetoric and argument in favor of
road improvements set forth in the _Programme of the Virginia Good
Roads Convention_, (Roanoke: Stone Printing, Co., 1894) held in
Richmond in October 1894. As to the effects of the rise of automotive
travel, see Fairfax County Chamber of Commerce, _Historic, Progressive
Fairfax County in Old Virginia_, (Alexandria: Newell-Cole, 1928), pp.
20-21, containing a road map of the county's hard-surfaced roads and
unimproved roads in 1928.
[117] Porter, _County Government_, p. 291.
[118] Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, _Annual Report, 1969_, p.
6.
[119] Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, Minute Book, v. 5, 318,
William Deming was the architect of this project. As with previous
expansions of the clerk's office, the old building was torn down and
the bricks re-used in the new building.
[120] Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, Minute Book, v. 5, 318; v.
9 (1939-40), 501; v. 10 (1941-42), 175; v. 12 (1949-50), 4; v. 18
(1950-51), 497; v. 20 (1953), 519.
[121] Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, Minute Book, v. 30 (1960),
pp. 418-23.
[122] Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, Minute Book, v. 32, 264-65
notes that Reston offered 50 acres for the use of the courthouse, and
Tyson's Corner and the intersection of Routes 495 and 50 also were
considered. See also, _Ibid._, v. 39 (1964), 117.
[123] Fairfax County Deed Book, B-2, pp. 373-376; 503-504. The
courthouse commissioners were Charles Little, David Stuart, William
Payne, James Wren, and George Minor.
[124] Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, Minute Book, v. 36, 313; v.
39, 544. On April 7, 1965 the Board of Supervisors voted to construct
a new office building and authorize a referendum for a $5,500,000 bond
issue for this project. The bonds were approved by the voters, and the
building was built on a 35-acre tract belonging to Mary Ambler, which
was condemned by the city and then purchased by the county from the
condemnor. The architect for the project was William Vosbeck, and the
contractor was the Blake Construction Company, Fairfax County Board of
Supervisors, _Annual Report_, 1968, p. 4.
CHAPTER VII
THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE COURTHOUSE AND ITS RELATED BUILDINGS
1. THE COURTHOUSE COMPLEX
Among the courthouses built in England's North American colonies,
those of Virginia developed characteristics which expressed peculiarly
well the prevailing patterns of landholding and manner of conducting
local government. Unlike New England, where each small community had
its frame meeting house, containing within its walls "all the ideals,
political, moral, intellectual and religious of the people who
attended,"[125] the seats of county government in colonial Virginia
were centrally located in rural settings. A few county courthouses
grew into regional centers of commerce, industry and finance; but most
remained independent and apart from any surrounding community, and
some may still be seen today standing "as solitary sentinels, symbolic
of government."[126]
It was also characteristic of Virginia that these courthouses were not
single buildings, but were complexes of several structures. The
typical courthouse compound was enclosed by a brick wall, inside which
were a courthouse, a jail, a clerk's office, and, sometimes, a row or
cluster of offices for lawyers. Invariably, also, an inn or ordinary
occupied a site within the compound or immediately adjacent to it.
This style of courthouse may be found through Virginia, dating from
earliest colonial times; and, although many fine courthouses are found
in the early architecture of Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania and
North Carolina, none of these areas developed the design concept of a
courthouse compound.
This design concept was used in the courthouses of Fairfax County at
Springfield (1742-1752) and Alexandria (1752-1800); and it was
followed in the county's third courthouse which was completed in 1800.
The courthouse tract was situated near the geographical center of the
County, at the intersection of the Little River Turnpike and the old
Colchester Road. The tract consisted of four acres, acquired by a deed
from Richard Ratcliffe and his wife Serian. Specified in the deed were
structures including a courthouse, clerk's office and goal, "... and
every other building and Machine necessary ..."--the latter presumably
referring to gallows, pillory, stocks, and the like. The May 1798
Fairfax County Court Order Book did specify that the courthouse should
be forty-by-thirty feet with a twelve-foot portico, the gaol
forty-by-twenty, the clerk's office twenty-by-eighteen and covered
with slate or tile, a gaoler's house twenty-four-by-eighteen feet, and
that stocks, pillory and whipping post also be provided by letting the
entire "... building of the same to the lowest bidder."[127]
In accordance with statutory requirements, space was delineated for
the prison bounds. This was done in March 1800, and the area was
described in a survey and report of the commissioners, as
follows:[128]
In obedience to the order of the worshipful Court of this County,
hereunto annexed, we the subscribers in company with Col. William
Payne, the Surveyor of this County, proceeded this thirteenth day
of March Eighteen Hundred, to lay off ten acres of ground for the
prison rules of this County, and have ascertained and bounded the
same by the following meets and boundaries, ... including the said
four acres, the Court house, Gaol, Clerk's office, the brick
Tavern, Kitchen, Stables and store house, and beg leave to report
the same with the plat thereof hereunto also annexed.--Given unto
our hands and seals:
Thomas Gunnell (Seal)
N. Fitzhugh (Seal)
T. Ellzey (Seal)
Whether all of the buildings mentioned in this report actually existed
at that time may be questioned, since the survey plat shows only the
courthouse, clerk's office and jail. As to these three, the plat
showed the courthouse situated as at present, with the clerk's office
almost directly south a distance of about 300 feet, and the jail about
the same distance south, but in back and west of the clerk's office.
The plat does not show roads or other features of the platted parcel,
but the known position of the courthouse in relation to the turnpike
supports the suggestion that the brick tavern referred to was located
on the north side of the turnpike, the building later known variously
as the Willcoxen Tavern, the Union Tavern and the Fairfax Tavern. The
other buildings referred to in the report apparently left no traces,
for except through an occasional glimpse of them in old photographs of
the courthouse, they are not noted in the records of the court.
These buildings formed a cluster which, if it was not all neatly
enclosed within the courthouse fence, at least was immediately
adjacent to and integrated with the activities centered in the court.
In the first three decades of the nineteenth century, the town of
Providence grew up around the courthouse, and by 1835 some 50
dwellings and 200 residents were listed.[129] But the town never
eclipsed the courthouse; and, from its commanding position on the
gentle hill at the crossroads, the courthouse itself continues to
serve as a focal point and symbol of government.
_The Clerk's Office._ An office for the Clerk of the County Court was
mentioned in the survey of the courthouse lot made in March 1800, and
was shown on a location south of the courthouse about 200 feet and
east of the jail about sixty feet. According to the survey the office
was a relatively small building, one or one-and-one-half stories high,
with a chimney at the south end and a door opening on the east side.
This office was the depository of all important public records in the
county, and therefore was a focal point for much of the activity that
occurred at the courthouse throughout the year. A news report in the
_Alexandria Daily Advertiser_ of February 10, 1806 called for bids for
an addition to the clerk's office and repairs on the "public
building," all of which should be in accordance with a plan lodged
with Col. James Wren, and constructed of brick "covered with
slate."[130]
During the next forty years, the functions of the clerk grew in both
size and importance as he was called upon to serve both the County
court and the circuit court. The need for repairs combined with the
need for more space required increasing attention to the old building,
until, in 1853, it was determined that a new office building for the
clerk must be built. Newman Burke, George W. Hunter, Jr. and Alfred
Moss were appointed commissioners to oversee the demolition of the old
office building and the construction of a new one.
Fortunately, the commissioners' notice to builders, inviting bids on
these jobs, was published in the _Alexandria Gazette and Virginia
Advertiser_ of July 15, 1853, and provides a detailed description of
the materials and construction to be used. It included the instruction
that such of the old materials as could be used in the rebuilding
should be so used.
Like the courthouse building, the clerk's office suffered damage and
deterioration during the war years of 1861-65. When the courthouse
compound became a headquarters for Union army patrols, and civilian
government either ceased or moved to a temporary seat elsewhere, care
and custody of the clerk's office could not be guaranteed. Many of
the record books and files were taken to places of safekeeping in
private homes. However, many could not be moved in time to prevent
them from being scattered, taken, lost or destroyed as soldiers
occupied the office building. When the war ended, the task of
re-equipping the office and restoring it to usefulness was a major
one.
[Illustration: The clerk's office about 1907.]
In 1875, the clerk's office burned and subsequently, a new office
building was added to the courthouse complex. It was a two-story brick
building, larger than the old clerk's office and located beyond it to
the south of the courthouse. It was probably completed by 1881, at
which time the board of supervisors was appropriating funds for new
furnishings. The architecture of this newest office presented a
mixture of three styles. In overall appearance, its square shape,
hipped roof and functional design were reminiscent of the eighteenth
century buildings of James Wren. The late nineteenth century's
preference for exterior decoration was illustrated by a dentiled
cornice, a belt of corbelling three courses wide in the brickwork
below the cornice, and brick pilasters on each side of the main
doorway, topped by scrolls and brackets supporting the pediment. In
the center of the building on the second floor, a Palladian-style
window was installed, providing a contrast to the design of the other
windows. Two courses of corbelling also appeared on the two chimneys
located at the back and in the center section of the building.
Notwithstanding these exterior decorations, the general design of the
office represented a recognition of the needs of office workers and
the response of late nineteenth century architects to provide light,
air, and functional efficiency in the arrangement of space for
offices. Telephone service and electric lights were installed in the
clerk's office in 1902.[131]
After 1932, the old clerk's office was demolished. A new office
building was erected south of the courthouse in 1934, with labor and
materials provided by Federal and Virginia relief funds. This building
was demolished when the extensive addition was made to the courthouse,
1951-1954. A new wing was put on the back of the courthouse in 1956 to
accommodate the rapidly increasing quantities of archives generated by
the business of courts and the clerk's office in a county whose
population was growing at an unprecedented rate.[132]
_The Jail._ As shown in the survey of the courthouse tract, made in
March 1800 by the County Surveyor, William Payne, the jail was located
on the southwestern corner of the original four-acre tract. No
contemporary descriptions or records of the jail have survived, but
the survey sketch shows a two-story building with chimneys at each
end. Presumably the construction material for the jail was brick,
since the other principal buildings in the Fairfax courthouse compound
were made of this material.
With regard to the interior arrangement and description of major
features, conjecture is also necessary. But, again presumptions may be
made that its facilities were the same as others of the time--for
example, that the bars used on doors and windows were the flat type
(rather than round or other shapes), which were laid across each other
to form a lattice and riveted together where they overlapped. Also, in
accordance with contemporary custom, it may be presumed that the
jailor and his family made their home in the same building with the
prisoners, and so attended to their meals and other needs.
Exactly when and how the first jail was constructed at the courthouse
site is not entirely clear. Payne's survey in 1800 showed a jail
building on the site. Yet only nine years later the _Alexandria Daily
Advertiser_, April 8, 1809, carried an invitation for bids to build a
jail at Fairfax Court House. Moreover, although the records of the
county court for the next fifty years contain references to repairs
and construction work for the jail, they customarily fail to include
descriptions of work to be done. Accordingly, little can be gleaned
from these sources to aid the architectural history of the courthouse
complex.
[Illustration: The jail, built about 1886. Photo taken in 1972.]
[Illustration: Police Department, about 1947. Photo courtesy the
Fairfax County Historical Society.]
Along with the other public buildings at the courthouse compound, the
jail suffered during the years of war from 1861 to 1865. When civil
government ceased to function at the courthouse, competing groups that
claimed civil authority in Fairfax County used jail facilities in
neighboring Alexandria and Leesburg when the need arose. During the
latter years of the war, when Union troops occupied the courthouse,
the jail offered its facilities as a storehouse as well as a place of
detention for military prisoners. But the Army of the Potomac had
little time or incentive to keep the jail in good repair, and so, like
the courthouse, it suffered extensively from the war.
During the 1870's, repairs and construction of additions to the
original building restored the jail to service. The 1879 G. M. Hopkins
_Atlas_ showing the courthouse complex depicts the jail as being
larger than the courthouse in size. In 1884, fire destroyed this
building, and arrangements had to be made to use the Alexandria city
jail until a proper new jail could be constructed for the county.[133]
The new jail was located directly behind (west of) the courthouse,
facing onto the Little River Turnpike. Its materials and construction
indicate that the original portion was added to on two later
occasions. When finally completed, the jail was a two-story T-shaped
brick building, with a one-story wooden porch across the full length
of the front. In the original section (facing onto the turnpike) the
windows have plain wooden pediments. The cornice and chimney tops are
corbelled, and there are iron cresting and finials on the ridge of the
hipped roof. In the second section, which forms part of the stem of
the "T," there are segmental arches over the windows and an ornamental
cornice consisting of a course of bricks laid vertically. In the third
section, which completes the stem of the "T," the brickwork is laid in
Flemish bond (matching the courthouse brickwork in contrast to the
common bond of the rest of the jail), and the windows are topped with
flat arches. The second and third parts of the building are covered
with a gable roof.[134]
In this new jail building, the jailor had living quarters in the front
portion, and until 1948 these were used as his residence. The building
itself ceased to be used for detention of prisoners shortly after that
time, for when the addition to the courthouse was completed in 1956,
jail facilities were incorporated into this addition. Since 1956, the
old jail building has been used for offices of various county
agencies, including the juvenile court and probation office, civil
defense office, fire board, police dispatcher, and recreation
department.[135]
_Associated Buildings and Structures._ Certain structures were
associated with the courthouse because they were required by statute,
and others had their origin in custom and convenience. In 1792, when
the legislature of the new state government revised the law relating
to organization of the local courts, it reenacted most of the features
of the system which had been followed in colonial times. By law all
counties had to build and maintain a courthouse, jail, pillory,
whipping post, and stocks. This law also required that there be two
acres of land around the buildings of the courthouse, and that prison
bounds of ten acres should be provided for the "health and exercise of
prisoners."[136] A report of a survey of the courthouse tract in March
1800 shows metes and bounds for a four-acre tract within a larger
ten-acre area, and states that this land was for the purpose of
erecting a courthouse, jail, clerk's office, kitchen, stable, and
storehouse plus providing an area to serve as the prison bounds.
Additionally, a well was dug a short distance south of the courthouse.
Altogether, these comprised the complex of structures associated with
the court in the first half of the nineteenth century.
_The Tavern._ The brick tavern was a substantial building, built on
the north side of the Little River Turnpike directly across from the
courthouse complex. No detailed description of this building as it
appeared in 1800 has been found. It was, at least in later years, a
multi-story building which rivalled the courthouse in size, and
expanded as the patronage of the circuit-riding judges and their
entourages of attorneys and others combined with the regular passage
of travellers on the Little River Turnpike to create a prosperous
business climate.
After the Civil War, the brick tavern was purchased by Col. H. B.
Taylor, who operated it during the 1870's and 1880's. Because of its
favorable location near the courthouse, the tavern continued to be
frequented by those who had business with the court, and lawyers
maintained their offices there. An advertisement in the _Fairfax
Herald_ of April 8, 1887 refers to the building as the Union Hotel,
and describes it as a three-story brick building with annex,
containing about twenty-five rooms, with stable and outbuildings, a
two-acre garden and a fine well--"a desirable residence for summer
boarders." Later in 1887 the name was changed from Union Hotel to
Fairfax Hotel and its management was taken over by James W.
Burke.[137]
The hotel continued to be operated until 1932 when it was demolished
to clear the site for subsequent construction of a building for the
National Bank of Fairfax. The bricks, mantels and doors from the hotel
were re-used in construction of the home of Helen Hill and Francis
Pickens Miller, called "Pickens Hill." It is located on Chain Bridge
Road north of Fairfax, and in recent years has become a major building
of the Flint Hill private school complex.
_The Well._ At the time of construction of the courthouse, a well was
dug on the south side of the building. Over the years, pictures show a
variety of overhead coverings to shelter the well and its users. The
well was a large one, appearing to be four or five feet in diameter at
the top, and was surrounded by a raised platform. Standing on this
platform, one drew water from the well by a windlass operated by a
hand-crank. Later the box on which the windlass was mounted was fitted
with a hand pump, and a trough for filling buckets or other containers
was placed at the side of the well. This well served the courthouse
into the twentieth century, but was closed and capped when the town of
Fairfax installed underground water mains. The gazebo-like well
structure was moved to Sully.
"_Public Comfort Station._" Many references to the early privies in
use on the courthouse grounds appear in both the court order books and
the board of supervisors minute books. As recently as 1931, outside
toilets were still in use. In October of that year, "the County
Engineer was instructed to make necessary repairs to the public
comfort station on the Court House lawn."[138]
_MEMORIALS_
_Memorials of the Wars._ On the lawn in front of the old courthouse
stand two monuments to the honored dead of four wars. The John Quincy
Marr monument was erected on June 1, 1904, by the Marr Camp,
Confederate Veterans, commemorating the first Confederate officer
killed in the Civil War. The second monument was erected under the
auspices of the Fairfax County Chapter of the Daughters of the
American Revolution. On a bronze plaque on one side are listed those
Fairfax Countians who gave their lives in World War I and on the
other, a plaque listing those who gave their lives in World War II and
the Korean conflict.
[Illustration: Naval cannon in front of the courthouse.]
[Illustration: The Marr Monument commemorating the first Confederate
officer killed in the Civil War, June 1861. Photo from the National
Archives.]
Two naval cannons stand on either side of the Marr monument, pointed
toward the National Bank of Fairfax, formerly the site of the brick
tavern. Facing the bank, the cannon on the left is inscribed with an
anchor and the following lettering: 12 PDR Boat Howitzer 1856 J.A.D.
U.S.N.Y. Washington 757 LBS. 58 PRE No. 45. The cannon on the right
has inscriptions which are very worn and indistinct. There is an
engraved anchor, but except for a letter here-and-there, the
inscription is unreadable.
[Illustration: World War I Memorial Plaque.]
[Illustration: World War II and Korean Conflict Memorial Plaque.]
_Plaques and Portraits._ Mounted in the inside north entrance hall
beside the oldest portion of the courthouse are three plaques. One is
a tablet with 160 names of Civil War veterans of Marr Camp,
Confederate States of America. The second is a memorial to George Auld
(1832-1919), born in Scotland, who "was for many years Chairman of the
Board of Supervisors of Fairfax County, Virginia...." The third is a
plaque commemorating the building of the first addition to the
courthouse, A.D. 1929, W. I. Deming, Architect, and C. H. Brooks,
Builder. In the central entrance hall, there is a bronze plaque
commemorating the large addition to the courthouse completed in 1954,
Robert A. Willgoos and Dwight G. Chase, Architects, and Eugene Simpson
and Bro., Contractor. A large mural, painted by Esther L. Stewart in
1954, is hung above the landing of the grand central staircase. It
depicts Fairfax County scenes, buildings, and portraits of Lord
Fairfax, George Washington, and George Mason.
[Illustration: Mural at the Central Staircase, Fairfax County
Courthouse. Painted in 1954 by Esther L. Stewart.]
On the brick floor of the arcaded porch of the first (1800) section of
the courthouse, is a National Register plaque (1974 listing) placed by
the Fairfax County History Commission in 1976. In the hall inside
hangs a plaque from the Virginia Historic Landmarks Commission
commemorating the building's placement on the State Register in 1973.
Hanging on the walls of this oldest court chamber are oil portraits of
county notables. (See Appendix for biographical listing.)
On the courthouse lawn, a dogwood tree was planted in 1954 dedicated
to the firemen of Fairfax County. A small bronze plaque with a poem
and the dedication was set in a cement post under the tree, by the
Firemen's Auxiliary.
In the wake of its many unresolved historical mysteries, the restored
courthouse remains a functional courtroom, as required by the terms
authorizing the work. Yet it cannot claim to represent any particular
period of Fairfax County's history with full historical or
architectural integrity. As now redesigned and rebuilt, the courthouse
presents an outward appearance presumably similar to its original
form. The interior achieves the pleasant appearance and atmosphere of
a working courtroom of the past.
NOTES FOR CHAPTER VII
[125] Catherine Fennelly, _The New England Village Scene: 1800_,
(Sturbridge: Old Sturbridge Village, 1955), p. 9.
[126] Sidney Hyman, "Empire of Liberty" in _With Heritage So Rich_,
(New York: Random House, 1966), pp. 5-6.
[127] Fairfax County Deed Book, B-2, pp. 373-377; 503-504.
[128] Fairfax County, Record of Surveys, 1742-1856, p. 93.
[129] Joseph Martin, _Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of
Columbia_, (Charlottesville: Martin, 1835), p. 168.
[130] Fairfax County, Record of Surveys, Section II, p. 93, March 13,
1800.
[131] Fairfax County Board of Supervisors Minute Book, #1, pp. 89, 91,
196, 206 (1871-1881).
[132] Interview with Thomas Chapman, Jr., former Clerk of the Circuit
Court; Fairfax County Board of Supervisors Minute Book #6, pp.
580-582, August 20, 1934; architectural drawings, 1951-1956,
Facilities Management Office.
[133] Fairfax County Court Minute Book, 1882-1885, April Court, 1884,
"The County Jail having been destroyed by fire ...," the county court
ordered that Alexandria city jail be used until a proper jail could be
erected in the county.
[134] Fairfax County Court Minute Book, June Court, 1891.
[135] Interview with Thomas P. Chapman, Jr.
[136] Hening, _Statutes_, October 1792, XIII, 453-455.
[137] _Fairfax Herald_, May 13, 1887, notes that Mr. T. R. Sangster
has removed his law office to the Fairfax Hotel; The Union Hotel and
Fairfax Hotel sometimes have been assumed to be separate buildings.
However, identical advertisements of this hotel appeared in the
_Fairfax Herald_ on April 8, 1887 and May 6, 1887, the former calling
it the Union Hotel, and the latter calling it the Fairfax Hotel. The
April 29, 1887 _Fairfax Herald_ reports the rental of the Union Hotel
by Burke. By tradition, the hotel building across from the courthouse
has been known as the Willcoxen Tavern or just simply "The Tavern."
[138] Fairfax County Board of Supervisors Minute Book, #6 p. 139,
October 2, 1931.
2. THE COURTHOUSE
_The Courthouse Plan and Its Architect._ The design of the Fairfax
County Courthouse followed the Virginia tradition that the seats of
civil government should be designed with dignity as well as adequacy
for their function.[139] Consequently, the courthouse building, which
in other respects was a plain rectangular two-story brick structure,
departed from strict utilitarian design with its open arcade on the
ground floor front, and its cupola in the center of the roof, serving
as a base for the flag pole and housing the bell which was used to
announce the convening of court.
The advantages of the two-story building for innovations in design and
decoration were even more evident with respect to the interior.
Entered through the front door which opened into the arcade, the
courtroom gave the same impression of vaulted space that is associated
with the nave of a church.[140] The space over the arcade on the
second floor was enclosed, and presumably used as the jury room. This
room was entered from a balcony located across the front of the
building (the back of the court chamber) and along each side of the
building. At the front of the chamber (as it appeared in the late
nineteenth century) was a raised bench, and directly to the left of
the judge's seat was a doorway leading into a pair of rooms used by
the Court.
No descriptions of the interior of the courtroom as it appeared in the
early part of the nineteenth century have been found; but it is
probably that the business of the court was transacted, as it had been
since early colonial times, at a large table, centered in the main
chamber of the courthouse and spacious enough to seat the justices of
the County Court and the sheriff, if the business of the day concerned
him. One or more separate tables customarily were provided for the
clerk of the court and those of his staff who attended the court
session. It was also customary to separate the portion of the
courtroom occupied by the Court from that occupied by the public, and
this was accomplished by installation of a wooden railing or
partition. Fireplaces heated the courtroom chamber and a second-floor
fireplace heated the jury room above the open arcade. Details of the
plastering and woodwork, the lighting fixtures and other hardware are
not known, yet it seems certain they must have been of good taste and
design, for their selection was in accordance with a plan prepared by
James Wren, the designer of The Falls Church, Christ Church in
Alexandria, and probably Pohick Church.
Although James Wren's name appears frequently in the public records of
Fairfax County during the eighteenth century, his principal legacy was
the architecture he designed and helped to build. In the 1760's
references to him are found throughout the Vestry Books of Truro
Parish and Fairfax Parish.[141] In 1763 he prepared the plans for
construction of The Falls Church, which formed the nucleus of the
village which grew up around it. In 1767 he designed the plans for
Christ Church in Alexandria. Wren and William Weit were each paid
forty shillings in 1769 for plans furnished to the vestry, for Pohick
Church.[142] He had, through design of these and other structures,
earned a reputation as the foremost builder and designer of buildings
in his locality[143]--a reputation attested to by numerous contracts,
recorded in the Fairfax County Court Order Books, under which young
men were apprenticed to him to learn the "trade sciences or occupation
of a Carpenter and Joiner."
According to Melvin Lee Steadman's genealogy of the Wren family,[144]
James Wren was born in King George County about 1728, the son of John
Wren and Ann Turner Wren. He learned his trade of carpentry and
joining there, and about 1755 he moved to Truro Parish, Fairfax
County. The first reference to James Wren in the land records of
Fairfax County is found in a deed dated June 15, 1756 in which one
James Scott conveyed to Wren a tract of 200 acres on which Wren was
then living. Ultimately, Wren built a home, now called "Long View,"
adjacent to the present city of Falls Church, and assembled a
substantial plantation, known as "Winter Hill," now within Falls
Church City. He also operated, at Winter Hill, "Colo. Wren's Tavern."
James Wren served as a justice of the County Court. He was a trustee
of the Town of Turberville which in 1798 was laid off on land near the
Little Falls of the Potomac but never fulfilled the hopes of its
promoters. Following his military service in the Revolutionary War he
held various offices in the County government, including that of
sheriff and commissioner of the tax. He acquired extensive
landholdings in Fairfax and Loudoun Counties. James Wren was married
three times; first, in 1753, to Catherine Brent of Overwharton Parish
(Aquia Church); next, about 1771-74 to Valinda Wade, and last, to
Sarah Jones of Alexandria in 1804. He died in 1815 and was buried at
Long View.[145]
The architecture which James Wren created for the courthouse--as well
as his churches and the numerous private buildings he designed and
built under contract or for his friends--reflect the general level to
which that art had advanced in colonial Virginia. The styles were
adapted from prototypes in England.[146] Innovations which were made
in adapting these styles to American use were, in most instances,
attributable to the differences in building materials and the types of
skilled labor which were available to the American builder.
_The Origin of the Courthouse Design._ The architectural design which
James Wren selected for the Fairfax County Courthouse utilized several
features which already were familiar hallmarks of public buildings in
colonial Virginia, and in particular the colonial capitol at
Williamsburg--probably the most impressive public building in Virginia
at that time. The use of brick as building material, the use of two
stories, topped by a cupola, and, most strikingly, the use of arches,
all combined to suggest the influence of this capitol building on the
courthouse design.[147] The courthouse was far from being a copy of
the capitol and Wren added to these familiar features several new ones
that made the courthouse an architectural innovation in its own right.
When it was completed in 1800, the Fairfax County Courthouse was the
first example of a new design which architectural historians have
called "the town hall style,"[148] and have traced to English town
halls of the late seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Like the
Fairfax County Courthouse, these town halls were two-story brick or
stone buildings which presented to their front a gable-end,
ground-floor arcade (or piazza) covering the main opening onto the
street, an entrance set into the end wall, and, frequently, a cupola.
The town halls of Blandford in Dorset (1734), and Amersham in
Buckinghamshire (1682) illustrate these features with variations of
details.
No documentary evidence has been found to show how James Wren evolved
his design for the Fairfax County Courthouse; but it seems probable
that he knew of this style that was enjoying current popularity in
England, and that John Bogue, the "undertaker" who built the
courthouse, was familiar with the methods of constructing such
buildings, for Bogue had just come to America from England in 1795.
While the similarity of geometric and structural exterior design
strongly suggests that the Fairfax County Courthouse had its
architectural ancestry in the English town halls of that period, the
analogy is weaker when functions are compared. The courthouse for
Fairfax County was designed and used entirely as the seat of local
government. The commercial activity that was attracted to the
courthouse site on "court days" enjoyed no special privileges or
facilities in the building. In contrast, town halls in eighteenth
century England often served the dual purpose of providing a
facility for transaction of public business and carrying on the
commerce of the community. The style of the English town halls
provided space in the open arcade of the ground floor to house a
farmers' and tradesmen's market, and space in the second floor chamber
for the town council to meet and do its work.[149]
The origin of this type of building is not entirely clear. It is
difficult to imagine it growing naturally in the political and social
climate of the villages which grew up clustered around England's
medieval castles and monasteries. At the time when town-and-market
halls were common in the central squares of free towns in Italy,
Germany and the Low Countries, they were absent in England. Their
appearance in England dates from the seventeenth century when town
government developed its own identity, and when British political and
cultural alliances with the Dutch were established.[150]
Imported to Virginia as a form of courthouse building, this town hall
style became a popular prototype for buildings erected in several
counties during the first three decades of the nineteenth century.
After being introduced in Fairfax County in 1800, this style appears
in the Nelson County Courthouse built in 1807, the Caroline County
Courthouse built in 1808, the Sussex County Courthouse built 1825-28,
and the Madison County Courthouse built 1829-30. Variations in the
layout of the interior appeared in the use of the space over the
arcade; sometimes it was used for the jury room, and at other times it
was used to accommodate a balcony for spectators.[151] After 1824,
however, a new style of courthouse building may be seen in the public
buildings of Virginia counties. Based on the neo-classical lines of
the State Capitol, designed by Thomas Jefferson, there came into being
a series of courthouses which were suggestive, if not actual,
representations of the seat of state government.[152]
_The Courthouse._ In its exterior appearance the Fairfax County
Courthouse underwent little change during the first century of its
service. Indeed, looking at the courthouse square in 1900, it might
have seemed that the courthouse was the only building that had not
been rebuilt, relocated or significantly expanded. The effects of
passing time were more evident in the evolution of the layout and
furnishings of the court.
Throughout the first half of the nineteenth century the interior of
the courthouse probably remained similar to the layout described in
colonial times. Generally the focal point of the court chamber was a
long table at which the County Court was seated, flanked by smaller
tables where the court's clerks did their work. Customarily, also, a
railing across the room separated this space from visitors whose
business or curiosity led them to crowd in upon the court and its
staff. As long as the gentlemen justices of the court were in reality,
as well as name, the governing authority of the County, this
arrangement of the courthouse chamber was the most sensible that could
be suggested.
As the purely judicial duties were isolated and assigned to the
professional judges of the District Court it became customary to
renovate the court rooms to install the features which have become
associated with litigation--the raised bench of the judge, the jury
box, the witness stand, and counsels' tables.
These changing ideas of what a court chamber should look like became
established during the first half of the nineteenth century, and were
reflected in the courthouses built in Virginia during that period.
Therefore, when the Fairfax County Courthouse was restored to service
after the Civil War, its interior design resembled that which was
customary for judicial chambers.[153]
That the task of renovation and restoration was extensive is indicated
by a report in the _Alexandria Gazette_ of October 17, 1862 stating
that "The interior of the courthouse of Fairfax County has been
entirely destroyed. Nothing remains of the building but the walls and
the roof." Moreover, the work of renovation had to be carried out
under the double difficulty of shortages of funds and labor that was
skilled in cabinetmaking and metalworking. In the end, the restoration
of the courthouse was a gradual process in which first one and then
another improvement was added. No grand design seems to have been
followed or a complete record of accomplishments maintained. Hence,
evidence of the courthouse furnishings is seen in such separate
notations in the Court Minute Books as follow:
October Court, 1866.
Ordered that the Com. of Public Buildings be instructed to
purchase enough green-baise to cover the table in the bar And have
it covered before the Circuit Court commenses.[154]
December 11, 1876.
Ordered that the Com'r of Public Buildings have the sawdust
removed from the floor of the Courtroom, and have said floor
covered with a substantial cocoa matting at the expense of the
Court.[155]
December Court, 1882.
... Some person or persons have entered the Court House Building
in the night, without authority and have damaged Said building and
have greatly annoyed the citizens living nearby by violently
ringing the bell. It is therefore ordered by the Court, that such
trespass ... will be punished to the full extent of the law.[156]
The bell referred to by the Court was a standard feature of many
Virginia courthouses, and was rung to announce the convening of court
sessions. In the Fairfax County Courthouse, the bell was hung in a
cupola on the roof, and rung with a bell-pull passing through the
building's attic to the balcony level of the courtroom.[157]
A major change in the appearance of the courtroom occurred with the
installation of wooden benches in the public section of the chamber.
Tradition holds that the benches had been pews at one time in
Jerusalem Baptist Church located on the Ox Road between Fairfax and
Fairfax Station. This church had been built on the site of the old
colonial "Payne's Church."
Illustrating the period when gaslights replaced candles, an elaborate
brass chandelier fitted for gas illumination has been found in the
courthouse attic. It is possibly the fixture which the sheriff was
directed at the February 1890 court to purchase, for a price not to
exceed $25.00. In about 1902, electric lights were installed.[158]
During the restoration of the courthouse following the Civil War one
major alteration of the exterior appearance of the courthouse occurred
when the brickwork between the windows on the first and second floors
was removed to change the windows into single two-story-long vertical
openings. The courthouse windows remained this way until 1968 when
renovation of the original section of the courthouse was carried out,
and double rows were reestablished as they appeared in photographs
taken during the Civil War.
[Illustration: The old courthouse, 1800, prior to restoration in
1967.]
[Illustration: The old courthouse after restoration in 1967.]
Reportedly, another major refurbishment of the courtroom occurred
about 1920. In keeping with the style of that time, the emphasis was
on panelling with dark, polished woods, and moderately ornamental
carving which achieved an appearance of massiveness and dignity. The
judge's bench was located at the west end of the courtroom on a raised
platform and behind a heavy wooden balustrade. Against the west wall
of the room and behind the judge's bench, wooden panelling covered the
space from the southwest corner of the room to a doorway beside the
bench which led into smaller chambers in the rear. This panelling was
topped with a swan's neck pediment behind the judge's chair. At floor
level, beside the judge's bench and behind the balustrade, were the
witness stand and clerk's desk.
The jury box was located along the south wall of the room and faced an
enclosure where tables for counsel and reporters were placed. These,
in turn, were separated from the public seats by a carved wooden
balustrade. Seating for the public on the ground floor was provided in
two sections of wooden benches--the former church pews referred to
earlier--separated by a center aisle. At the rear of this section was
another balustrade setting it apart from the open space inside the
door to the entrance arcade. The two fireplaces in the corners of the
east end of the room were bricked-in and covered with plaster.
On the south wall, a stairway provided access to the balcony over the
open portion of the room adjacent to the outer entrance. From the rear
of the balcony were doorways into a jury room and small office which
occupied the second-floor space over the entrance arcade. Three rows
of benches, each raised one step above the one in front, provided
additional seating space for visitors in the balcony. The ceiling of
the courtroom was sheet metal (tin) with a pattern of ridges arranged
in rectangular shapes. Central heating was provided by hot water
radiators.
In 1929, an addition was constructed on the south side at the rear of
the original courthouse, making an L-shaped building. In this process
the clerk's office which was built in 1876 was torn down. Harmony of
scale, materials and style were maintained between the old and new
sections.[159]
[Illustration: The old court room prior to restoration. Photo by Lee
Hubbard, 1966.]
Twenty years later, in 1951-56, the courthouse again was expanded by
addition of a center block, and another wing identical with the
original and first addition segments. At the rear (west side) of these
new portions, two wings were added to house, respectively, the records
of the clerk's office and a new, larger jail. With the completion of
this construction, the old courtroom in the original wing of the
building ceased to be used regularly for judicial business. Two large
courtrooms and several smaller chambers in the center block of the
building provided facilities for hearing cases. The new and larger
building also provided space for the offices of the County's elected
officials and most of the major boards, commissions and administrative
departments which comprised the county's government in the
1950's.[160]
In both exterior and interior appearance, the courthouse additions of
1931 and 1954 were designed to harmonize with the original style James
Wren established in 1800. The use of brick, gable-end roof lines,
proportioning of the scale of various segments of the building,
compatible fenestration and colonial period styles in hardware and
painting all contributed to this result. Most influential of all in
maintaining this architectural integrity, perhaps, was the use of
archways and open arcades at the entrances to the center block and two
wings. These open arcades, with their simple, undecorated keystone
arches are the distinguishing features of the Fairfax County
Courthouse in the 1970's as they were in 1800.
[Illustration: The central entrance to the 1954 addition to the
courthouse.]
NOTES--2. THE COURT HOUSE
[139] William O'Neal, _Architecture in Virginia_, (New York: Walker,
1968), p. 17, remarks that "Traditionally, in Virginia buildings
housing civil government have been developed beyond the utilitarian.
This tradition, of course, has given us not only a remarkable group of
eighteenth and nineteenth century courthouses, but, just yesterday,
the very beautiful City Hall complex of Norfolk by Vincent King."
[140] _University of Virginia Newsletter_, (Charlottesville: Institute
of Government, University of Virginia), XLIII, No. 11, (July 15,
1967).
[141] A summary of these references is contained in Melvin Steadman,
_Falls Church by Fence and Fireside_, (Falls Church, Va.: Falls Church
Public Library, 1964), pp. 463-520.
[142] O'Neal, _Virginia Architecture_, pp. 127, 133, 143, _Minutes of
the Vestry, Truro Parish, Virginia_, 1732-1785, (Lorton, Va.: Pohick
Church, 1974), p. 114.
[143] Steadman, _Falls Church_, p. 471.
[144] The genealogy and a summary history of the Wren family, both in
England and America, is in Steadman, _Falls Church_, pp. 463-520.
[145] Janice Artemel, "James Wren, Gentleman Joiner," (unpublished
manuscript, Falls Church, Va., 1976).
[146] According to Sir Banister Fletcher, _A History of Architecture_,
Rev. ed., (New York: Scribners, 1963), p. 1126, "In general, the
architecture of a particular area mirrored that of the homeland of the
colonizers or settlers of that area, with modifications occasioned by
climate, the types of building material obtainable, and the quality of
labour available. Thus, in seventeenth century New England building
followed the pattern of English weather-boarded heavy timber-frame
prototypes, while in eighteenth century Virginia we find a 'Georgian'
architecture often almost indistinguishable from that of eighteenth
century England."
[147] Carl Feiss, "Court Houses of Virginia," lecture delivered at the
meeting of the Latrobe (Washington) Chapter, Society of Architectural
Historians, held at the Arts Club of Washington, November 8, 1968.
[148] Marcus Whiffen, "The Early Courthouses of Virginia," _Journal of
the Society of Architectural Historians_, XVIII, No. 1 (March 1959),
pp. 2, 5-6.
[149] Thus the term "market hall" is sometimes also used to designate
these buildings. At times, the market activities may even overshadow
the building's associations with government, as in the case of
Blandford, Dorset, where a sign on the building identifies it as the
Corn Exchange, without mention of the Council's chamber.
[150] Sir Kenneth Clark, in his book, _Civilisation_. (New York:
Harper & Row, 1969), pp. 194-220, describes the impact of Dutch
accomplishments in the arts, and the impact of their influence on such
Englishmen as Christopher Wren.
The adoption of the Dutch style of market hall in England may well
have been a gradual one, utilizing the already familiar design of the
house of a typical town tradesman, which presented to the street a
series of arched openings where work was done and wares were displayed
during the day. At night these arches were shuttered, and the
tradesman had his living quarters on the second floor over his shop.
Sir Banister Fletcher, _A History of Architecture_, (New York:
Scribners, 1961), p. 463.
[151] Whiffen, "Early Courthouses," p. 6.
[152] William O'Neal, _Architecture in Virginia_, (New York: Walker,
1968), pp. 22-25.
[153] Whiffen, "Early Courthouses," p. 3.
[154] Fairfax County Court Minute Book, 1863-1867, p. 484.
[155] Fairfax County Court Minute Book, 1875-1879, p. 162.
[156] Fairfax County Court Minute Book, 1882-1885, p. 34.
[157] Examination of the courthouse attic in July 1967 revealed a
bell, complete with mounting and wheel, with the following
inscription: "TW & RC SMITH ALEXANDRIA 1844." It has not been
determined when this bell was installed in or removed from the cupola.
It was rehung in the cupola and rung again in 1976.
[158] Examination of the courthouse attic in July 1967 revealed a
brass chandelier with six arms, approximately 24 inches long, fixed to
a central hub. Burners at the end of each arm were fitted to hold
glass globes or lamp chimneys. Fairfax County Court Minute Book,
1888-1892, p. 216. The end of the gaslight era occurred shortly after
1900, when, according to Thomas Chapman, former Clerk of Circuit
Court, electric lights were installed in the clerk's office in 1902
and shortly thereafter in the courtroom.
[159] Interview with Thomas Chapman, former Clerk of Circuit Court.
[160] Fairfax County Board of Supervisors Minute Books, No. 17, p. 4,
November 21, 1949; No. 18, pp. 2-9, November 15, 1950, pp. 296-298,
May 22, 1951.
3. RESTORATION OF THE ORIGINAL WING OF THE COURTHOUSE, 1967
_Origin of the Restoration Project._ After the second addition to the
courthouse was completed in 1954, the old courtroom in the original
wing of the building ceased to be the focal point of the court's
activity. Similarly, it ceased to receive the attention needed to deal
with the natural deterioration produced by use and the passage of
time. By the early 1960's these effects were evidenced by leaking
roofs, unreliable plumbing in the heating system, cracked and
crumbling plaster, loosened floors and hardware, and the like. In
order to retain its usefulness, the original wing of the courthouse
needed substantial renovation.
At this time, an interest in the old courtroom was expressed by the
Fairfax County Bar Association and the county's newly formed
Historical Landmarks Preservation Commission which together proposed
that the work of renovation be done in such a way as to restore the
original appearance of the courtroom. The Bar Association formed a
Special Committee for Restoration of the Old Court Room under the
chairmanship of C. Douglas Adams, Jr., and the assistance of the Board
of Supervisors was sought.[161]
In December 1964, the Board appropriated funds for developing a
restoration plan. Walter Macomber, a local restoration architect who
had done similar work on a number of early Virginia landmarks, was
retained to prepare the necessary plans. In March 1966, the Bar
Association's Committee reported the completion of this preliminary
work to the Board, and successfully secured the latter's approval
together with an appropriation of $90,000 for actual construction
work. This work was commenced without further delay and was completed
in the spring of 1967.[162]
_Problems of the Restoration._ While the work undertaken in 1965 and
1966 was at the time referred to as a restoration, it was in fact
impossible under the circumstances to reproduce with complete accuracy
the appearance of the courthouse in 1800. No descriptions of the
courtroom or other records of building specifications had been found;
nor was any special research in eighteenth century sources undertaken
for this purpose. As a result, the work produced a courtroom with
idealized colonial-period interior design and furnishings in a
building shell with reconstructed floor plan and structural design of
the early Federal-period (during which it had initially been built).
Numerous difficult problems were faced in this reconstruction, and,
for the most part, they were resolved in ways that served primarily to
create a room with the atmosphere of Virginia's colonial period, and
secondarily to build an authentic replica of the Fairfax courthouse as
of any particular historical date.
[Illustration: FLOOR PLANS.]
An initial problem connected with the exterior alterations was that of
securing bricks and mortar to match those of the original courthouse.
Bricks secured from a manufacturer of specialty bricks turned out to
be a close match for the originals which were thought to have been
fired from clay dug in Fairfax County.[164] Specially mixed mortar
made from sand, lime and white cement also closely simulated the color
and texture of the older mortar. Bricks were laid in Flemish bond
which matched the courthouse and part of the old jail building.
Using these new materials, broken and crumbling bricks were replaced
throughout the building, and the three long windows on both the north
and south sides of the courthouse were altered to form two rows of
smaller windows, with the space between the first and second-floor
rows filled with new brickwork. This change in the fenestration
restored the building to its appearance as shown in Civil War
photographs of the courthouse. Shutters similar to those shown in the
same pictures were added to the windows on both floors.
On the roof, some repairs were needed to restore the slate shingles.
In the cupola, wooden louvres were repaired, the cupola was painted,
and a weathervane restored to the top. An existing galvanized sheet
metal roof was allowed to remain unchanged.
For the inside of the building there were no photographs or drawings
of the earlier periods, and reconstruction was influenced largely by
physical evidence disclosed as the interior was systematically
dismantled down to the building's outer shell. When woodwork,
hardware, plaster and flooring were removed, it was found that much of
the framing timber was infested by termites, and had to be replaced.
In this process numerous signs of earlier workmanship were revealed.
Beneath the existing tin-plate ceiling was a plastered ceiling and
remnants of a painted frieze of red, yellow, blue and green. Behind
this ceiling were laths laid over hand-hewn oak rafters. A few of the
original hand-split laths and hand-made nails remained in this
ceiling. In its reconstruction, the ceiling was furred and replastered
without any decoration. No lathwork was found on the side walls, and
in the reconstruction fresh plaster was applied directly to the
bricks.[165]
[Illustration: Interior of the gutted courthouse during restoration in
1966. Photo by Lee Hubbard.]
The flooring which was removed from the central section of the
courtroom sloped from the back (east end) of the room toward the
judge's bench (at the west end). Beneath this floor was an older floor
of brick. It was not determined whether this brick work had been the
original floor of the courtroom or whether another wooden floor had
overlaid it prior to the one just removed. In its reconstruction,
however, the architect specified that a flat floor of polished pine
should be laid over the bricks.[166]
In one part of the main floor the older brick work was allowed to
remain exposed. This was in the vicinity of the fireplaces in the two
corners of the open area at the rear (east end) of the courtroom.
These two fireplaces were reopened and restored and their brickwork
was extended to form spacious hearthstones.
The corner fireplaces showed signs of a three-stage evolution. They
were originally used as open fireplaces. Holes in the brickwork above
them suggested, however, that at some later time the open fireplaces
were replaced by wood-burning or coal-burning stoves standing on the
brick hearths with their stovepipes fitted into the chimneys. Finally,
when the stoves were replaced by central heating and hot water
radiators, the entire fireplace wall was sealed with brick and
plastered over. In their restoration the corner fireplaces were
reopened and refurbished as they were thought to have appeared in
their original condition.
As the side walls were cleared of plaster, they showed signs of
staircases from the ground level the balcony along the north as well
as the south side of the courtroom. Thus when the stairs along the
south wall were replaced, a similar set of stairs was built and
installed on the north side of the courtroom. No dates for the
original installation or removal of these staircases were determined,
and it was presumed that the dual staircases were part of the original
design of the courthouse.
A more difficult puzzle was presented by a series of holes in the
outer wall aligned at the level of the balcony and about the size used
for beams. Speculation by the architect suggested that these holes
might have been intended for use in extending the balcony along three
sides of the courtroom instead of merely along the back end, or in
covering the entire room and creating a full second story for the
courthouse. No determination of their use was made, and they were
disregarded in the reconstruction of the courtroom.
[Illustration: Interior of restored courtroom facing the judges'
bench. Photo by Charles Baptie, 1971.]
[Illustration: Interior of restored courtroom facing balcony. Photo by
Lee Hubbard, 1969.]
Still another mystery which was not solved in the restoration
concerned the two chimneys located in the corners at the west end of
the old courtroom. No fireplaces or hearthstones were found in the
courtroom floor, and when the interior was dismantled it was
discovered that the chimneys rested on beams above the courtroom
ceiling. These chimneys were not utilized in reconstructing the
courtroom, and the only suggestion offered was that they probably had
been connected by long pipes to stoves in the room below.[167]
Two doors in the west wall of the courtroom on either side of the
judge's bench presented a further problem since they were not part of
the original 1800 building, but had been part of the addition built in
1929. One of these doors led into a set of judge's chambers and the
other (in one corner) opened into a corridor leading to the main
portion of the addition running south from the old courthouse. In the
restoration these doors were retained, but fitted inconspicuously into
the panelling behind the judge's bench. Above the doors, the architect
restored two windows which he felt had been part of the original
building.[168]
Restoration of the judge's bench brought still more difficulties to
maintaining the original design of the courtroom. As plaster was
removed from the wall behind the judge's bench, the bricks showed
marks of an arch. The judge's bench which ultimately was constructed
and installed at the west end of the courtroom was, like the other
woodwork, created by the architect "according to patterns used in
colonial times."[169]
Other details of the interior were handled the same way. Hardware used
by the architect was all new, but used old designs. Since the original
colors used in the interior were not determined, the architect used
white and gray shades of paint similar to those in colonial buildings.
From the ceiling in the center of the courtroom were hung chandeliers
found in the courthouse attic. While not of "colonial" design, they
were used because they were considered appropriate due to former
association with the courthouse. And, as noted earlier, the pews
which possibly had been obtained from the Jerusalem Baptist Church
were retained in the restored courtroom.[170]
_General Setting and Building Site._ The original Fairfax County
courthouse today comprises the north end section of the courthouse
building. Together with its immediately adjacent grounds, the present
courthouse complex occupies almost the entire four-acre tract which
was the original site. This tract still forms a square near the center
of the City of Fairfax, at the intersections of two main roads, Routes
236 (Little River Turnpike) and 123 (Chain Bridge Road). The general
setting is gently rolling terrain, and the courthouse site is on a
slightly higher elevation than the surrounding area, with stone
retaining walls on the two sides facing the turnpike and road. On the
west side of the courthouse building is a parking lot occupying
approximately two acres. The twelve-story county office building
(Massey Building) completed in 1969 is located approximately 200 yards
south and west of the courthouse.
_The Exterior_
_Overall Dimensions._ The restored, original courthouse building is a
plain rectangle, 61 feet long by 32 feet wide. It is oriented with the
long sides facing north and south, with the main entrance at the east
end of the building. A portico extends across the entire east end of
the building, covering an area 12 by 32 feet. The height of the
building at the gable ends is 32 feet; and the height of the eaves
from the ground is 21 feet.
_Foundations._ As originally built, the courthouse rested on brick
foundation walls, anchored at the corners in brick piers, with a crawl
space of approximately 1-1/2 to 2 feet in height beneath all but the
front (east) quarter of the floor space. Additional brick bases,
approximately 18 inches square and resting on the ground, were located
in the crawl space beneath the two columns supporting the courthouse
balcony. In the late nineteenth century, a partial basement was dug
beneath the central section of the courtroom.[171]
As reconstructed, the exterior foundation walls were pointed up and
repaired, and were strengthened by the addition of several new
footings. Across the back (west end) of the building, the crawl space
was deepened to a uniform 3 feet, and four 12 × 12 inch brick piers
were placed on concrete footings. In the center section of the
courthouse, the basement walls were extended 1 foot to carry the
joists of the new floor, the outside entrance was closed up, and a new
staircase for the interior entrance was built at the south end of the
basement. Next to the basement toward the front (east end) of the
building, another crawl space (measuring 8-1/2 × 25-1/2 feet) was
deepened to a uniform 3 feet, and a new wall was built on the east
side, extending the full width of the building. This new wall was 8
inches thick, and constructed of cinder block and brick, anchored with
16 × 16 × 12 inch concrete footings. Beneath both crawl spaces and the
basement a 3-inch thick concrete slab was laid. The crawl space did
not extend to the front exterior wall of the building. A space of 13 ×
30 feet across the front of the building, consisting of the area
beneath the open entrance foyer of the courtroom, originally had been
covered only by a layer of bricks resting on the bare ground. As
reconstructed, this brick was taken up and re-laid on a 4-inch thick
slab of concrete which had been poured on a base of 4 inches of
crushed stone covered by polyethylene film.
_Walls._ The exterior walls of the courthouse are constructed of red
brick, with new bricks specially selected during the 1967 restoration
to match the remaining original materials, and laid in Flemish bond,
1-1/2 feet thick. Across the front of the building, the portico is
entered through a series of arches supporting the second-floor front
section of the building. The three arches across the front of the
building are 7 feet wide and 11 feet high at the center of the arch.
The arches at the north and south ends of the portico are 6-1/2 feet
wide by 11 feet high. The brick columns supporting the arches are
1-1/2 feet square. The arches and columns are plain except for white
marble keystones and white marble slabs, 6 inches thick, placed at the
foot of each arch and serving as bases for the columns.
_Chimneys._ All five of the chimneys which the courthouse had in the
early nineteenth century were retained in the reconstruction. The two
chimneys on each of the north and south sides stand at points which
correspond to the four corners of the courtroom, and rise 11-1/2 feet
above the roofline at the eaves. In the center of the table end at the
front of the building, the fifth chimney stands, extending 5 feet
above the ridge of the roof. All five chimneys are corbelled with two
courses of brick at the top, and with a single course of brick 1-1/2
feet below the chimney top. All of the chimneys measure 2 feet by 1
foot 9 inches.
_Doors and Windows._ In the 1967 reconstruction of the courthouse, the
fenestration was changed to resemble the appearance of the building in
about 1861. Accordingly the three tall (14-1/2 foot) existing windows
on the north and south sides of the building were converted into two
sets of smaller windows, one above the other, and regularly spaced
along the sides of the courtroom. In the upper row, a fourth window
was located over the arch in the portico, and serves the rooms in the
second-floor chamber at the front of the building. The chamber also
has two windows on the front of the building.
The upper row windows are of a double-hung sash design, with 12 over 8
panes (9 inches × 10-3/4 inches) set in wooden frames and sills.
Overall dimensions of these windows are 4 × 5-1/2 feet. The three
windows on the lower level are slightly larger--4 feet × 6 feet 9
inches, and have 12 over 12 panes. Both rows of windows are shuttered;
those of the upper row are louvred, and those in the lower row have
solid panels.[172]
On the ground level at the front of the building, the main doorway of
the courthouse is located in the center of the wall, and flanked by
one window on each side. The door is panelled, and 8-1/2 × 4-1/2 feet
in size.
In the reconstruction, new window sashes and a new door were
installed, but the existing jambs were used wherever possible. All
shutters, glazing materials and hardware used in the reconstruction
were new.
_Roof._ The original roof of the courthouse was covered with slate
shingles, and the reconstruction of the building merely applied
repairs to these shingles as needed. Little of the slate which
remained in 1967 was thought to have dated from the original
construction, however, because of the extensive repairs and
renovations carried out after the Civil War.
_Cupola._ The cupola, located at the ridge of the roof, 9-1/2 feet
from the gable end at the front, was part of the original design of
the courthouse and houses a bell once used to announce the convening
of the court sessions. The cupola was constructed of white pine, and
consists of a square box in which is mounted an octagonal compartment
with louvred sides. Topping the panelled portion of the cupola is an
onion-shaped dome, culminating in a ball which, according to
photographs over the years, served as a base for a weathervane or
flagpole. In reconstruction, a weathervane found in the courthouse
attic was installed on the cupola's top. The roofing of the cupola
dome is sheet metal.
_Ornamentation._ The overall appearance of the courthouse is plain,
and, with the possible exception of the cupola, there is only one
feature which shows the intention to combine ornamentation with
functionalism in the architectural design. This feature is a round
"fan window" framed by a circle of bricks in the center of the gable
end of the building's front wall. The lower half of this window
consists of four pie-shaped wooden panels. The upper half of the
window consists of louvres.
_The Interior_
_Foyer._ The double doors in the center of the portico at the east end
of the courthouse open inward into a foyer at the rear of the
courtroom. This area is 29 feet long, the full width of the building.
The width of the area varies, however, because of the fireplaces
across each of the front corners and the curving rear edge of the
central (or spectator) portion of the courtroom. At its narrowest
point in front of the double doors the foyer is 10 feet 4 inches wide,
and at its widest points on either end of the room, it is 12 feet
wide. The foyer space is entirely open, with flooring composed of
bricks (8 × 3-1/2 inches) varying in color from deep red to charcoal
gray. These bricks are laid with three-quarter inch seams and white
mortar.
The fireplaces in the corners at each end of the foyer have square (2
foot-8 inch) openings, with brick lining and a 5 inch facing
surrounding the opening and painted flat black. The fireplaces are
entirely framed with plain architraves and friezes, and are topped
with simple mantels. Each fireplace measures 3 feet 11 inches wide by
4 feet 3 inches high.
Along the walls of the foyer, panelled wainscotting, painted white, is
installed. Because of the unevenness of the floor, the height of this
wainscotting varies from 4 feet 2 inches to 4 feet 3 inches. Its
panels are of varying width, from 3 to 6 inches, and are beaded. At
the base of the wainscotting is a 5-inch baseboard.
Above the wainscotting, the walls and ceiling are finished in plain
plaster with walls painted mauve and the ceiling white. Lighting
needs are minimal because of four outside windows located in the
foyer, and because of light received from the central section of the
courtroom. On each side of the double door and at each end of the
foyer lanterns are mounted on the wall. These fixtures are of the type
commonly used as carriage gate or guardhouse lanterns, and are 9 ×
6-1/2 × 5 inches, with glass panels on three sides set in dark metal
frames. The tops are of curved metal designed to shield the lanterns
from the wind. Inside the lanterns, light comes from a single
candle-shaped light bulb, set inside a small hurricane lamp chimney.
The hardware on the double door consists of a box lock with the brass
knob polished and the lock-box and keeper painted flat black. At the
top and bottom of the door black metal shot bolts of designs commonly
found in eighteenth century buildings are installed.
_Central Section._ Space for the seating of spectators is provided in
the central section of the courtroom. The floor level of this section
is raised 7-3/4 inches above the floor of the foyer, and free-standing
wainscotting of the same style and height as are around the foyer
walls separate the foyer from the central section. The floor of this
section is constructed of 5-1/4 inch dark-stained pine boards.
Entry into this section is along two aisles at the sides, running
between the spectator seats in the center of the room and the balcony
staircases set against the walls on the north and south sides of the
room. Spectator seating is provided in five rows of benches of pine,
with natural finish on the seats and back rests, white painted sides
and bases, and natural cherry moldings along the top of the back rests
and arms. Along the base at the front of each bench, is a 6 inch strip
painted black. The back of the back rest is painted white down to a
point 6 inches above the floor, where a foot rest of dark-stained pine
is installed, and below this the base is painted black.
The five rows of benches in the center section are curved, generally
following the arc of the edge of the raised flooring, and measure 17
feet 9 inches from end to end. Each bench seats about twelve people.
The walls of the center section are painted mauve, and the ceiling is
white. There are no lighting fixtures in this section of the
courtroom. At the rear of the central section, two lightly stained
solid oak pillars support the balcony.
_Staircases._ Staircases to the balcony are located along the north
and south walls of the central section. The initial plans for
reconstruction of the courtroom in 1967 called for only one staircase,
on the south wall. The decision to add a staircase on the north side
came during the reconstruction when evidence of an earlier staircase
on that side was revealed as the plaster was removed. From this it was
conjectured that the courthouse of the early nineteenth century had
had two staircases, but that one had been abandoned in reconstructing
the building after the Civil War.
The present stairways each have 18 steps with 8 inch risers and treads
2 feet 11 inches wide by 10 inches deep. They form a single flight,
open style stairs, with no brackets and plain balusters, 1 inch
square, painted white and supporting a cherry handrail. Newel posts at
the top and foot of the stairway have turned shafts with cube bases
and capitals. A flat sphere of solid wood tops the capital of the
newel post.
Beneath the staircase on the north side of the building is a closet,
and on the south side is a stairway leading into the basement. The
doors to this closet and stairway are made of vertical beaded boards
similar to the wainscotting, each equipped with two "H" hinges of
black metal having a pebble finish and black metal box locks with
small polished brass doorknobs.
_Balcony._ The courtroom balcony contains three rows of wooden benches
similar to those on the ground floor, except that they are straight
instead of curved. The rows are arranged so the two rear benches are
on daises raised 9 inches above the one in front. Solid-panelled
free-standing wainscotting is set along the back of the rearmost
bench. The first two rows of benches are 17 feet 7-3/4 inches long,
while the rear bench is 22 feet long, allowing space at each end for
the steps of the raised dais.
In front of these benches, across the full width of the balcony
between the two staircases, is a railing of plain white spokes
(matching the balusters of the staircase) and a plain cherry handrail
2 feet 11 inches in height.
The ceiling of the balcony is painted flat white and the walls are
mauve. White beaded board wainscotting standing 3 inches high is
around the sides and rear wall of the balcony similar to that on the
ground level. Three recessed lights provide light for the balcony.
_Jury Room._ At the rear of the balcony an aisle 3 feet wide runs the
full width of the building, allowing passage behind the rows of
balcony benches and access to the jury room through doors near each
end of the aisle. The jury room uses the space above the first-floor
portico, an area 12 × 19 feet. The doors to the room are 2 feet 10
inches by 6 feet 10 inches, with 4 panels. Doors and frames are
painted white, with brass doorknobs and modern locks set in the doors.
The wall between the jury room and balcony is a new stud partition
which is finished with white plaster, as is the ceiling. Lighting is
provided by 3 recessed lights set in the ceiling and equally spaced.
The walls of the room have a 3-inch baseboard, but no wainscotting.
Centered in the exterior (east) wall of the room is a fireplace,
reopened in the 1967 reconstruction. This fireplace measures 4 feet
6-1/2 inches by 4 feet 7-3/4 inches, and is framed with a plain white
architrave and mantel. A hearth of brick extends 18 inches out from
the fireplace. Opposite the fireplace is a 12 by 18 inch plastered
masonry pier extended up from the exterior wall at the rear of the
portico on the first floor below. In the ceiling next to the pier is
located a 30 by 36 inch opening into the attic, with a ladder built
into the partition wall immediately below.
_Bench, Bar and Jury Box._ Across the front of the courtroom is a
railing separating the judges bench, jury box, and space for counsel
tables from the central section of the courtroom. This railing,
similar to those of the staircases and balcony, stands 2 feet 8-1/2
inches high. Gates 3 feet wide and mounted on double spring hinges are
placed in the railing at the head of each side aisle in the central
section. Each gate has an S-curve wooden support built into it for
added support.
The enclosure formed by the railing or bar is raised 7-1/2 inches
above the floor level of the central section, and is floored with
yellow pine, tongue-and-groove, 3-inch wide flooring. In the center of
this enclosure, against the west wall of the courtroom is the judge's
bench, flanked on its right by the witness stand. The bench itself is
relatively small, measuring 6 feet 5 inches across and 4 feet 7 inches
from back to front. Three steps on each side permit access from both
directions, and have balustrades on the front side similar to the
railings and other balustrades in the courtroom.
On the wall behind the judge's bench, there are two, high 12-over-8
pane windows, backed by closed, full-louvred shutters. Behind the
shutters is the solid plaster wall of the present courthouse's main
corridor. Between and below these windows is a wooden raised-panel
screen serving as a back for the judge's bench. Two 6-panelled
sections at each end of this screen are flanked by fluted pilasters
with modified capitals supporting a plain entablature. Between these
sections are 3 panels, the two on either end being composed of 3 tiers
of panels edged with fluted pilasters. The center element of this
panel consists of two large raised rectangular panels topped by a
semi-circular louvred wooden fan design, then a round keystone arch,
the whole portion of the composition topped by a high monumental
pediment. At its center point, the height of this composition is 8
feet 6 inches.
This ornamental panelling also covers the space where doorways
previously had been cut for passage between the courtroom and other
portions of the courthouse as they were built from 1930 onward. Prior
to the 1967 reconstruction, a doorway in the west wall was located on
the judge's left side as he sat on the bench. As presently
reconstructed, this doorway has been closed and covered by panelling,
but a new door was cut through on the judge's right-hand side, and the
inside of the door is constructed and fitted so as to serve as the end
piece of the ornamental woodwork behind the judge's bench.
The jury box is in the southwest corner of the courtroom. Across the
front of the box is a panelled solid railing, standing 2 feet 8 inches
from the floor of the west end of the courtroom. The jury box contains
2 rows of benches, each raised an 8-inch step above the one in front.
The front row is 9 feet 3 inches long, with aisles 18 inches wide at
each end allowing passage from the second row to the front, and
openings in the railing. Not having this function of access, the back
row of the jury benches is 14 feet 1 inch in length. Benches in the
jury box are designed and constructed similar to those of the balcony.
The witness box is located between the judge's bench and the jury box.
This box is constructed of solid wooden screen, painted white and
topped with a cherry handrail. The screen forming the back of the box
is plain; the screen at the front is in the shape of half of an
octagon, and the face of each element contains a single recessed
panel similar to those on the front of the judge's bench. The side of
the witness box facing the jury is open to allow entry into the box,
and the side next to the judge's bench is formed by the side of that
fixture. The flooring of the box is made of 3-inch wide, yellow pine
boards, finished naturally, and the flooring is raised one step (7-1/2
inches) from the courtroom floor. The dimensions of the box are 2 feet
10 inches across and 3 feet 8 inches from back to front.
Illumination of the area of the bench and jury box is provided by a
variety of fixtures. On the wall at the rear of the jury box two
carriage gate or guardhouse lanterns are attached. Opposite these, on
the wall at the north side of the room, two other, similar lanterns
are located. In the ceiling above the area enclosed by the bar, 10
recessed lights are installed in two rows of 4 lights across the front
and rear sections, and a pair are located equidistant between these
rows. Hanging from the ceiling over the central area are chandeliers
which were found in the attic of the courthouse during the 1967
reconstruction, and refurbished and wired for electric lights. The
lighting fixtures consist of six 24-inch arms, made of hollow brass
tubing, extending out from a central hub. The hub, in the shape of a
cup and decorated with a series of radial ridges, is on the lower end
of a 38-inch hollow brass shaft, equipped at the top with a hook for
suspension from the ceiling. As installed in the courthouse, each
chandelier hangs from a fixture in the ceiling by a metal chain
approximately 5 feet long. At the end of each arm of the chandelier
are plain disc-shaped bases (3 inches in diameter) which holds one
candle-shaped electric socket and a glass hurricane lamp chimney.
_Basement._ A small basement measuring 11 feet in width lies across
the center section of the courthouse. An interior entrance to this
basement is provided by a staircase located at its south end. This
stairway, 3 feet 6 inches wide with 7-3/4 inch risers, has 10 steps,
and is not panelled or painted. At the present time, the basement is
used to house heating and air conditioning equipment.
Small windows are located at both the north and south ends of the
basement. Approximately square, these windows measure 2 feet 2 inches
by 2 feet 9 inches, with 3-over-2 panes (6 by 12 inches). Both have
sills composed of a single slab of stone 2 inches thick. Both also are
below ground level, and open into brick-lined spaces for light and air
dug out by the wall's foundations. The space for the window on the
north side of the building measures 4 feet 1 inch by 3 feet 3 inches.
On the south side of the building, however, the dug-out space measures
7 feet 8 inches by 2 feet 9 inches and suggests that this was, at an
earlier date, the point where an outside entrance to the basement was
located. This is corroborated by markings on the inside of the
basement wall which show that a doorway in the north end of the
basement has been bricked up, and also that a second window similar to
the existing one has been closed up with bricks, leaving the sill slab
in place. From the basement, galvanized steel ducts covered with
insulating material are run through the crawl spaces beneath the
courtroom floor to outlets and intakes for circulation of air. These
openings are located in the sills of the recessed windows of the
courtroom and in the bases of the benches for spectators and jurors,
and are covered with steel grilles painted to blend with the fixtures
in which they are set.
3. RESTORATION OF THE ORIGINAL WING OF THE COURTHOUSE, 1967
[161] Other members of the Special Committee were Edward D. Gasson,
James Keith, John T. Hazel, Jr.; W. Franklin Gooding, Assistant Clerk
of the Courts; Senior Circuit Judge Paul E. Brown; and Bayard Evans,
Chairman of the Fairfax Historical Landmarks Preservation Commission.
[162] The cost of restoration was originally estimated at $74,488,
exclusive of architect's fee, which was to be 12 per cent of the total
cost. Ultimately, the cost of the work was slightly in excess of
$84,500, including the architect's fee, according to the architect's
records; Fairfax County Board of Supervisors Minute Book #45, pp. 192,
301, 406; Cost Sheet, Walter M. Macomber.
[163] The building contractor for this work was E. L. Daniels.
[164] Interview with Thomas Chapman, former Clerk of the Circuit
Court.
[165] The frieze was disregarded because it was not considered part of
the original courtroom interior, and no drawings, photographs or
descriptions of it were preserved.
[166] The sloping floor which was replaced was not dated, but probably
was installed when the courthouse was renovated following the Civil
War.
[167] On this matter the following statement in the _Northern Virginia
Sun_, January 8, 1966, 1, is of interest: "Anyone familiar with the
old courthouse will have noticed that it has five chimneys. The two
closest to the bench are resting on wood above the ceiling, Macomber
discovered. This, he said 'confused' him. He thinks that they probably
were connected by long pipes to stoves in the courtroom. Yet he is not
sure. It appears to Macomber that they were added at some later time,
but he will not know until he examines them more closely during the
restoration. If ... [there] are post-1800 andirons [in these
fireplaces], out they will go in the restoration."
In an interview on March 2, 1970, however, Macomber stated he felt
that these chimneys had been connected to stoves after the fireplaces
which they served were blocked up.
[168] The architect expressed the opinion that the addition to the
west end of the courthouse dated from about 1900; _Northern Virginia
Sun_, January 8, 1966, 1. However, no documentary evidence from the
county records supports this date; _Fairfax County Free Press_, August
25, 1966.
[169] Transcript of interview with Walter Macomber, March 2, 1970. As
to the arch marks, Mr. Macomber said: "On the front wall I found a
semi-circle deeply incised in the brick wall. I concluded there had
been an original arched design there and I reproduced such an arch as
it might have looked based on my studies of colonial architecture."
[170] Transcript of interview with Walter Macomber, March 2, 1970,
contains the following:
Question: Do you know what the original color of the room was?
Macomber: No. But since most of the buildings of that period were
either white or light gray, I used these colors.
Question: Was any of the original ironwork left?
Macomber: No. The ones installed are new but made from old designs
used in the colonial period.
Question: Where did the old chandeliers you installed in the
ceiling come from?
Macomber: They were discovered in storage. They are not colonial,
but since they were probably used at some time I thought it
appropriate to use them.
Question: Where did you get your ideas for the woodwork?
Macomber: I created it according to patterns used in colonial
times. The benches were brought in after the Civil War and had
come from the Payne [Jerusalem] Baptist Church. I thought it
appropriate to use them.
[171] _Fairfax County Free Press_, August 25, 1966; The basement
measured 11 × 25-1/2 feet and was located across the midsection of the
building. At the north end of the basement a stairway led to an
outside entrance, and at the south end another stairway provided
interior access. The basement was lined with 8-inch thick brick walls,
and was divided into two rooms of approximately equal size connected
by a doorway 2-1/2 feet wide.
[172] Prior to the reconstruction of the courthouse in 1967, the
shutters at the windows on the first floor of the front of the
building were louvred in the top half and solid panel in the lower
half. In the reconstruction, these shutters were replaced using
shutters with solid panels.
APPENDIX A
FAIRFAX COUNTY CLERKS OF THE COURT
1742-1976
Sources: Frederick Johnston, _Memorials of Old Virginia Clerks_;
Fairfax County Court Order Books.
Catesby Cocke 1742-46
John Graham 1746-52
Peter Wagener 1752-72
Peter Wagener, Jr. 1772-98
George Deneale 1798-1801
William Moss 1801-33
F. D. Richardson, _pro tem_ 1833-35
Thomas Moss 1835-39
Alfred Moss, _pro tem_ Oct.-Nov., 1839
S. M. Ball 1839-52
Alfred Moss 1852-61
Henry T. Brooks (military) 1861-65
W. B. Gooding (military) 1865-66
William M. Fitzhugh (military) 1866-67
F. D. Richardson, _pro tem_ 1866-69
D. F. Dulany (military) 1869-70
F. D. Richardson 1870-80
F. W. Richardson, _pro tem_ 1880-81
F. W. Richardson 1881-87
W. E. Graham 1887-1903
F. W. Richardson 1904-35
John M. Whalen 1936-45
Thomas P. Chapman, Jr. 1945-67
W. Franklin Gooding 1967-75
James E. Hoofnagle 1976-
APPENDIX B
JUSTICES AND JUDGES OF THE FAIRFAX COUNTY, CIRCUIT AND DISTRICT COURTS
1742-1976
Lists Compiled By E. Sprouse, P. Howe, V. Peters, A. Lewis, and N.
Netherton.
(Because of missing books and records, this listing is incomplete.)
First Commission for Fairfax County, _1742_
William Fairfax
John Colvill
Richard Osborne
Jeremiah Bronaugh
Lewis Elzey
William Payne
Thomas Pearson
John Minor
William Henry Terrett
John Gregg
Gerard Alexander
Edward Barry
Daniel Jennings
Thomas Arbuthnot
(_1742-1748_ Fairfax County Court Order Books are missing.)
_1749_
John Minor
William H. Terrett
Daniel Jennings
John Carlyle
William Ramsay
Charles Broadwater
Daniel McCarty
John Colvill
Moses Linton
Lewis Ellzey
William Payne
Richard Osborn
George W. Fairfax
Anthony Russell
Joseph Watkins
George Mason
Jeremiah Bronaugh
Thomas, sixth Lord Fairfax
Chief Justice
Stephen Lewis
_1750_
John West
Lawrence Washington
Catesby Cocke
_1752_
Fielding Turner
_1753_
Thomas Colvill
_1754_
Hugh West
_1755_
John West, Jr.
Sampson Turley
Sampson Darrell
James Hamilton
Oneas Campbell
_1757_
Henry Gunnell
_1758_
John Hunter
Robert Adam
William Bronaugh
William Payne, Jr.
_1759_
Bryan Fairfax
Townshend Dade
Benjamin Grayson
Edward Blackburn
Lee Massey
William Adams
_1762_
Hector Ross
_1764_
George William Fairfax
William Ellzey
John West
George Mason
Daniel McCarty
John Carlyle
William Ramsay
Charles Broadwater
Thomas Colvill dead
John West, Junior
Bryan Fairfax
Sampson Dorrell Sher.
Townshend Dade Quo:
Henry Gunnell
_1767_
Marmaduke Beckwith
Robert Adam
John Hunter dead
Richard Sanford
Wm. Payne
Benjamin Grayson
William Adams
Edward Blackburn
Hector Ross &
Alexander Henderson Gent.
George William Fairfax
Lewis Ellzey
John West
George Mason
Daniel McCarty
John Carlyle
Wm. Ramsay
Charles Broadwater
John West, Junr
Bryan Fairfax
Sampson Dorrell Quo:
Townshend Dade
Henry Gunnell
Wm. Adams
George Washington &
Daniel French Gent:
_1768_
George W Fairfax
Lewis Ellzey
John West
George Mason
Daniel McCarty
John Carlyle
Wm. Ramsey
Charles Broadwater
John West Junior
Bryan Fairfax
Sampson Darrel
Townshend Dade Quorum
Henry Gunnell
Marmaduke Beckwith
Robert Adam
Richard Sanford
Wm. Payne
Benjamin Grayson dead
Wm. Adams
Hector Ross
Alexander Henderson
George Washington
Daniel French &
Edward Payne Gent:
_1770_
John West
George Mason
Daniel McCarty
John Carlyle
William Ramsay
Charles Broadwater
John West Junr
Bryan Fairfax
Sampson Darrell Quor.
Henry Gunnell
Robert Adam
William Payne
William Adams
Hector Ross
Alexander Henderson
George Washington and
Edward Payne Gent.
(_1774-1782_ Fairfax County Court Order Books are missing.)
_1783_
John Gibson
George Gilpin
Richard Chichester
Robert McCrea
Charles Little
James Hendricks
Josiah Watson
Henry Darne
Thomas Lewis
Robert T. Hooe
_1784_
James Wren
David Stuart
David Arell
Charles Alexander
_1785_
William Deneale
John Moss
_1786_
George Minor
William Herbert
_1787_
Roger West
Richard Conway
Thomas Gunnell
John Fitzgerald
William Brown
Benjamin Dulany
Thomas Pollard
James Waugh
John Potts
_1788_
Martin Cockburn
William Lyles
(_1793-1796_ Fairfax County Court Order Books are missing.)
_1797_
Thompson Mason
James Keith, Jr.
_1798_
Francis Adams
John Stewart Alexander
James Coleman
Elisha C. Dick
Charles Eskridge
John Gunnell
William Gunnell
John Jackson
William Lane, Jr.
Ludwell Lee
Richard Bland Lee
Samuel Love
John Potts, Jr.
Richard Ratcliffe
William Stanhope
George Summers
William H. Washington
_1801_
Francis Adams
Charles Alexander
John S. Alexander
Charles Broadwater
James Coleman
Richard Conway
William Deneale
Elisha C. Dick
Benjamin Dulany
Charles Eskridge
John Fitzgerald
George Gilpin
John Gunnell
Thomas Gunnell
William Gunnell
William Herbert
Robert T. Hooe
John Jackson
William Lane, Jr.
Ludwell Lee
Richard B. Lee
Charles Little
Samuel Love
Daniel McCarty
Thompson Mason
George Minor
John Moss
William Payne
John Potts, Jr.
Richard Ratcliffe
William Stanhope
David Stewart (_sic._)
George Summers
William H. Washington
James Waugh
John West
Roger West
James Wren
Now dead: Love, Fitzgerald,
T. Gunnell, R. West,
J. Gunnell, J. S.
Alexander, D. McCarty
Now moved: Ludwell Lee
Now refuses to qualify:
Summers
Now in D. C.: Gilpin, Hooe,
Alexander, Conway, Herbert,
Potts, Dick, Washington
Now disqualified: Adams
_1802_
Augustine J. Smith
Humphrey Peake
John Keene
James H. Blake
_1803_
Samuel Adams, Jr.
_1804_
Richard Coleman
Spencer Jackson
George Graham
_1807_
Present:
William Gunnell, Jr.
William Payne
Wm. Deneale
Augustine J. Smith
Hancock Lee
Humphrey Peake
Spencer Jackson
Absent:
George Summers, Gentleman
Persons to be recommended to the Governor as proper persons to be
commissioned by him as Justices of the Peace, or added to the
Commission of the Peace for the County:
John C. Hunter
John C. Scott
Daniel McCarty Chichester
Joseph Powell
Edward Dulin
James L. Triplett
John Y. Ricketts
George Mason
_1808_
Present:
William Gunnell, Jr.
James Waugh
William Lane, Jr.
Thomson Mason
George Summers
Humphrey Peake
George Graham
James L. Triplett
Absent:
James Coleman
William Gunnell, Jr.
David Stuart
William Payne
William Deneale
Thompson Mason
Richard Ratcliffe
George Summers
Augustine J. Smith
James Waugh
Hancock Lee
Humphrey Peake
George Graham
John Coleman
Acting in _1816-17_
James Coleman
Wm. Lane, Jr.
Thompson Mason
Rich. Ratcliffe
John Jackson
Augustine J. Smith
Rich. M. Scott
Humphrey Peake
Rich. Coleman
Spencer Jackson
John C. Hunter
James L. Triplett
John T. Ricketts
Lawrence Lewis
Wm. H. Terrett
Henry Gunnell, Jr.
Alex'r Waugh
Geo. Minor
Geo. Gunnell
Francis L. Lee
John W. Ashton
Dan'l M. Chichester
Geo. Taylor
Wm. H. Foote
James Waugh
James Sangster
Thomas Moss
Dan'l Dulany
Chas. G. Broadwater
Wm. H. Fitzhugh
_1819-1826_
William A. G. Dade
Acting in _1824_
Rich. Ratcliffe
Rich. M. Scott
Lawrence Lewis
Spencer Jackson
John C. Hunter
James L. Triplett
Alex'r Waugh
Geo. Gunnell
Geo. Mason
Augst. J. Smith
John W. Ashton
Geo. Taylor
Wm. H. Foote
James Sangster
Thos. Moss
Dan'l Dulany
Chas. L. Broadwater
Wm. H. Fitzhugh
Chas. F. Ford
Benedict M. Lang
Eli Offutt
John Jackson
Robt. Ratcliffe
Chas. Ratcliffe
Wm. E. Beckwith
John Geanit
Mottrom Ball
Rich. C. Mason
Joshua Hutchison
Sam'l Summers
_1831-1838_
John Scott
Acting between _1825-42_
Geo. Millan
Silas Burke
Rich. H. Cockerille
Rich. C. Mason
Dennis Johnston
John D. Bell
John Gunnell
Frederick Carper
Spencer M. Ball
Edward Sangster
James Millan
Thomas Nevett
John H. Halley
Wm. Ball
John Millan
Geo. Mason
John B. Hunter
Henry Fairfax
Wm. H. Alexander
Frederick A. Hunter
Wm. A. Chichester
Alfred Moss
Chas. C. Stuart
James Hunter
Benj. F. Rose
James Cloud
Fred. M. Ford
Wm. R. Selectman
Nelson Conrad
W. W. Ball
Jno. Powell
Jno. A. Washington
Wm. H. Wren
_1839-52_
John Scott
John W. Tyler
_1852-55_
Silas Burke
William Ball
Wm. R. Selectman
W. W. Ball
John Millan
Nelson Conrad
William H. Wrenn
James Hunter
Ira Williams
Thomas Suddath
George H. Padgett
James M. Benton
John R. Dale
Thos. A. Davis
S. T. Stuart
Levi Burke
James Fox
Robert M. Whaley
Abner Brush
John Cowling
F. W. Flood
Francis E. Johnston
John W. Hickey
R. C. Mason
R. McC. Throckmorton
W. W. Elzey
Willis B. McCormick
William Barker
F. M. Ford
Francis C. Davis
John W. Hickey
Spencer Jackson
John N. Taylor
John B. Farr
J. C. Gunnell
John R. Grigsby
_1858-60_
John C. Gunnell
Tenley S. Swink
Richard L. Nevitt
Daniel Kincheloe
Francis C. Davis
Richard Johnson
W. B. McCormick
F. C. Davis
Ira Williams
Francis E. Johnston
Geo. H. Padgett
George Burke
John Burke
John Dole
John A. Washington
Alfred Leigh
Francis C. Davis
James Hunter
W. B. McCormick
William L. Lee
Wm. W. Ellzey
John Cowling
Benjamin F. Shreve
William S. Seitz
James P. Machen
George Padgett
James Simpson
---- Mann
W. W. Ball
Richard Johnston
B. D. Utterback
F. M. Ford
Cyrus Hickey
A. S. McKenzie
R. C. Mason
Henry Jenkins
_1863-1867_
Thomas P. Brown
James H. Rice
Wm. Terry
Andrew Sagar
Herain Cockrill
Samuel Pullman
Reuben Ives
Daniel W. Lewis
E. E. Mason
Levi Dening
Harry Bready
William A. Ferguson
William Walters
William T. Rumsey
Talmadege Thorne
Courtland Lukens
Metrah Makely
John B. Troth
George B. Ives
Josiah B. Bowman
Job Hawxhurst
George F. M. Walters
J. W. Barcroft
George W. Millan
Cyrus Hickey
James C. Dentz
B. D. Utterback
Thomas E. Carper
_1866_
John Powell
Lewis George
Francis Davis
_1867_
T. Wm. Barcroft
W. B. Bowman
Thomas E. Carper
Francis C. Davis
James C. Dentz
M. E. Fora
Wm. E. Ford
John B. Troth
Job Hawxhurst
George B. Ives
Richard Johnson
William Lee
Alfred Leigh
Courtland Lukens
Metrah Makely
E. E. Mason
Samuel Pullman
James H. Rice
W. T. Rice
Jonathan Roberts
Silas Simpson
Daniel Sims
Cyrus Stickey
B. D. Utterback
Wm. F. McWalters
_1868_
T. Wm. Barcroft
W. B. Bowman
Thomas C. Carper
N. P. Dennison
Francis C. Davis
James C. Dentz
Wm. E. Ford
John B. Troth
Job Hawxhurst
Richard Johnson
George B. Ives
Alfred Leigh
Courtland Lukens
Metrah Makely
E. E. Mason
Sam Pullman
W. T. Rice
Silas Simpson
Daniel W. Sims
Cyrus Stickey
R. D. Utterback
Geo. F. M. Walters
_1869_
T. Wm. Barcroft
W. B. Bowman
Jacob Brooks
Carter Burton
John L. Detwiler
Wm. E. Ford
John B. Troth
George B. Ives
Job Hawxhurst
Richard Johnson
Alfred Leigh
Daniel W. M. Lewis
Courtland Lukens
E. E. Mason
Samuel Pullman
James H. Rice
T. W. Rice
Samuel Shaw
Silas Simpson
D. Sims
Cyrus Stickey
B. D. Utterback
E. W. Wakefield
Wm. Walters
_1870_
T. Wm. Barcroft
W. B. Bowman
Jacob Brooks
Carter Burton
George B. Ives
Job Hawxhurst
Courtland Lukens
Samuel Pullman
E. W. Wakefield
Geo. F. W. Walters
_1870-1874_
Richard H. Cockerille
_1874-1885_
James Sangster
_1886-1899_
D. M. Chichester
_1897-1903_
James M. Love
_Virginia Circuit Court Judges_
John M. Tyler, 1852-1860
No record of a court held, 1861-1863
Edward K. Snead, 1864-1865
Henry W. Thomas, 1866-1868
W. Willoughby, June 1869
Lysander Hill, November 1869
James Keith, 1870-1894
C. E. Nicol, 1895-1907
Louis C. Barely, 1907
J. B. T. Thornton, 1908-1918
Samuel G. Brent, 1918-1928
Howard W. Smith, 1928-1930
Walter T. McCarthy, 1931-1944
Paul E. Brown, 1944-1966
Arthur W. Sinclair, 1950-1977
Harry L. Carrico, 1956-1961
Calvin Van Dyck, 1961-1967
Albert V. Bryan, Jr., 1962-1971
Barnard F. Jennings, 1964-
James Keith, 1966-
William G. Plummer, 1967-
Lewis D. Morris, 1968-
Percy Thornton, Jr., 1968-1977
Burch Millsap, 1968-
James C. Cacheris, 1971-
Thomas J. Middleton, 1975-
Richard J. Jamborsky, 1976-
_County General District Court_
Robert Fitzgerald, 1951-1955
John Corboy, 1954-1955
John A. Rothrock, Jr., 1955-
J. Mason Grove, 1955-
Martin E. Morris, 1965-
Donald C. Crounse, 1966-1974
Robert M. Hurst, 1972-
Lewis Hall Griffith, 1974-
G. William Hammer, 1976-
_Juvenile Court Judges_
Frank L. Deierhoi, 1965-
Richard J. Jamborsky, 1968-1976
Philip N. Brophy, 1973-
Arnold B. Kassabian, 1976-
Raymond O. Kellam, 1976-1977
APPENDIX C
PORTRAITS IN THE OLD COURTHOUSE
_James Roberdeau Allison_, (1864-1927), was born in Orange County,
Virginia, grew up in Centreville and taught school in Fairfax and
Loudoun counties. He served the county as deputy treasurer, deputy
sheriff and then was elected sheriff in 1904. Consistently re-elected,
he was sheriff until his death.
_Paul E. Brown_, (1904-1968), was born in Oklahoma, and moved to
Fairfax County with his family in 1919. He served as commonwealth
attorney for three terms and was appointed judge of the Fairfax County
Circuit Court in 1944. He served as senior court judge from 1951 until
his death.
_Daniel McCarty Chichester_, (1834-1897), was born in Fairfax County,
served in the Confederate army and later taught school in Maryland and
Tennessee. He practiced law and was for a short time superintendent of
schools and a delegate to the state legislature. He was elected judge
of Fairfax and Alexandria (Arlington) counties in 1886 and served
until his death.
_Bryan Fairfax_, (1737-1802), was born in Westmoreland County,
Virginia and grew up at Belvoir, in Fairfax County. He was a justice
of the Fairfax County court and was ordained as an Episcopal minister,
serving as rector of Fairfax Parish 1790-1792. He held the title of
eighth Lord Fairfax, Baron of Cameron, from 1800 until his death.
_Thomas, sixth Lord Fairfax, Baron of Cameron_, (1693-1781) was born
at Leeds Castle in Kent, England and immigrated to Fairfax County in
1747. In 1749, he was commissioned a justice of the peace in each
county within the entire Northern Neck, of which he was proprietor. He
was a trustee of the town of Alexandria and in 1754 became commandant
of the frontier militia. He lived at Belvoir until 1761, when he moved
to "Greenway Court," his estate in the Shenandoah Valley where he
spent the remainder of his life.
_C. Vernon Ford_, (1871-1922), was born in the town of Fairfax, and
practiced law with his cousin, Joseph E. Willard. Ford was appointed
commonwealth's attorney for Fairfax County in 1879 and, later elected,
served in this capacity until his death.
_William Edwin Graham_, (1850-1916), was born in Fairfax County. He
succeeded his father as clerk of the circuit court in 1887, serving
until 1904, at which time he became deputy clerk under F. W.
Richardson, serving in this position until his death.
_George Johnston_, (1700-1766), was a son of Dr. James Johnston, who
settled in Maryland in the seventeenth century. He was a trustee of
Alexandria and practiced law there and in Winchester. He represented
Fairfax County in the House of Burgesses from 1758 until his death and
was the author of certain resolutions presented by Patrick Henry in
1765, in opposition to the Stamp Act.
_Walter Jones_, (1776-1861), was born in Northumberland County,
Virginia and practiced law in Fairfax and Loudoun counties. Appointed
U. S. attorney for the District of Columbia, 1804-1821, he practiced
law before the U. S. Supreme Court and in Virginia and Maryland. He
was one of the founders of the American Colonization Society. At the
time of his death, he was Major-General of the militia of the District
of Columbia.
_William Henry Fitzhugh Lee_, (1837-1891), was born at "Arlington." He
rose to the rank of Major-General of cavalry in the Confederate army.
After the Civil War, he was elected a state senator and then a
congressman. He died at "Ravensworth" in Fairfax County while serving
his second term in congress.
_George Mason_, (1725-1792), the fourth of that name in the Virginia
colony was born on Dogue's Neck, now Mason Neck, then in Stafford
County, but now in Fairfax County. He was a justice of the county for
most of his adult life, and a trustee of the town of Alexandria. He
built his home, "Gunston Hall" in 1758. In 1774, he was the principal
author of the Fairfax Resolves, and in 1776, the principal writer of
the Virginia constitution and declaration of rights. The first ten
amendments of the constitution were added, in part, because of his
insistence on the necessity for a federal bill of rights.
_Robert Walton Moore_, (1859-1941), was born in the town of Fairfax,
and practiced law in the county. He served as a state senator and as a
congressman. In 1933 he was appointed an assistant secretary of state,
and in 1937, he became counselor of the Department of State.
Throughout his adult life he was a member of numerous boards and
commissions including the boards of visitors of the University of
Virginia and the College of William and Mary.
_Ferdinand Dawson Richardson_, (---- -1880), entered the clerk's
office in 1826 under William Moss, clerk, and served as an assistant
clerk or deputy clerk until 1870, when he was appointed clerk of the
court, which position he held until his death.
_Frederick Wilmer Richardson_, (1853-1936), was born in Fairfax, and
was the son of F. D. Richardson. He was deputy clerk under his father
for nine years, succeeding him in 1880. Elected to the new position of
clerk of the Circuit Court in 1881, he served in that capacity until
1887, and again from 1904 to 1935.
_Henry Wirt Thomas_, (1812-1890), was born in Loudoun County,
Virginia. He served as commonwealth's attorney in Fairfax and was
elected to the state legislature for a number of terms between 1841
and 1875. Following the Civil War, he was appointed judge of the Ninth
Circuit Court of Virginia and later appointed lieutenant governor to
fill out an unexpired term.
_John Webb Tyler_, (1795-1862), served Fairfax County as a judge in
the circuit court of Virginia from 1850-1861. The circuit included
Fairfax, Prince William, Loudoun and Fauquier counties and the
quarterly courts were held at the county seats, including Fairfax
Court House.
_George Washington_, (1732-1799), was born in Westmoreland County,
Virginia, and moved to "Mount Vernon" in Fairfax County when he was
sixteen. He became a surveyor, was elected a burgess, and appointed a
justice of the Fairfax County court. During the American Revolution,
he was appointed commander-in-chief of the armed forces of the united
colonies. He was elected the first president of the United States of
America under the new constitution in 1789, and again in 1793.
_Joseph Edward Willard_, (1865-1924), was born in Washington, D. C. He
practiced law, and was lieutenant governor of Virginia, 1902-1906.
President Woodrow Wilson appointed him minister to Spain in 1913;
later he was elevated to ambassador to Spain. He owned the Willard
Hotel in Washington, but lived part of his life in the town of
Fairfax, at "Layton Hall."
APPENDIX D
CLERK'S OFFICE
Excerpt from the _Alexandria Gazette and Virginia Advertiser_ July 15,
1853.
NOTICE TO BUILDERS--Sealed proposals will be received by the
undersigned, Commissioners, until Saturday, the 16th day of July
next, at 12 o'clock M, for taking down the present Clerk's office
of the Circuit Court of Fairfax County, and rebuilding it on the
same ground, with the materials and of the size and description,
following, to wit: The foundation wall to be 2 feet below the
surface, and 15 inches thick, of good stone, laid in mortar--the
walls above the ground to be laid on the stone foundation, of
brick, fourteen inches thick, and laid in good mortar,--the
building to be 36 feet long by 24 feet wide including the walls,
two stories high, and of the height of the present building, with
a passage of entry 12 feet wide, adjoining the County Court
office; the passage wall also resting on a stone foundation and
running from bottom to top--doors at each end of the entry, and
one door to each of the rooms--each room to have four windows,
twenty lights and 8 × 10 glass. The outer doors and window frames
to be of cast iron, with stone sills, and the doors and window
shutters to be covered with sheet iron, so as to be fire proof.
The joists to be 2 × 10 inches, 16 inches apart on the lowest
floor, resting upon a girder 6 × 12 inches; on the upper, without
a girder, but properly braced, and the flooring of the rooms to be
of the best North Carolina boards, planed, tongued and grooved,
and one and a quarter inches thick. The entry floor of best
flagging brick, and the stairway of stone. The roofing to be of
slate, of good quality, and the rafters to be substantially
framed, and suitable for slate roof. To each of the rooms there is
to be a fireplace. The woodwork is to be of the best material and
workmanship, and corresponding with the other work. The house is
to be guttered, and the iron, wood, and guttering to have two
coats of paint on it. Each door to be provided with suitable
locks, the house walls plastered, and the whole completed on or
before the last day of January 1854, at which time the work if
approved by the Commissioners, and also by the Court, will be paid
for. The proposals will state what the entire work will be done
for, including the furnishing of all materials and labor, and,
also, including the taking down of the old building and the use of
such of the old materials as can be used for rebuilding; also for
what the work will be done without regard to the old building,
either in taking down or the use of old materials. Notice to the
successful bidder will be given within five days after opening the
bids, and bond with security required from the person to whom the
contract may be awarded, but the Commissioners reserve the right
to reject all. For further information, apply to either of the
undersigned at Fairfax Court House.
.
NEWMAN BURKE )
GEO. W. HUNTER, JR. ) Comm'rs
ALFRED MOSS )
APPENDIX E
COURTHOUSE RESTORATION
SCHEDULE OF WORK TO BE PERFORMED IN THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE FAIRFAX
COUNTY COURTHOUSE, 1967
The following list comprises the schedule of work to be performed in
the reconstruction of the Fairfax County Courthouse as set forth in
the drawings prepared by Walter M. Macomber, architect for the
project, in December 1965:
_DEMOLITION_--Remove main floor, subfloor and joists, taking care to
leave two columns supporting balcony, and beams beneath floor
untouched. Remove all material in such a manner as to be re-usable if
suitable.
Remove all woodwork within building: wainscot, railings, bench, window
& door casing, etc. Remove all frame partitions.
Remove cantilevered forward section of balcony back to existing beam,
including stair.
Remove existing segmental-top two-storey windows at sides of building.
Remove sash only from existing small windows, unless jambs are rotted
or otherwise found unsuitable for re-use.
Carefully remove all finished flooring in balcony and porch chamber,
taking care not to damage subfloor.
All heating pipes shall be removed and temporarily capped off below
the first floor. All electrical wiring shall be removed and recapped
below the first floor level except such as shall be needed for power
tools, etc.
Contractor shall carefully remove all existing monuments and plaques
within building, securely store them, and reset them upon completion
at direction of architect.
_MATERIALS_--All new joists and studs shall be of construction grade
fir, free of all parasites & decay, having a moisture content no
greater than 18%.
All new subfloor to be 5/8" plyscord.
Apply sisalcraft paper between subfloor and finished floor.
All flooring shall be 25/32" × 5-1/2" tongue and groove clear southern
long leaf yellow pine, with relieved back & face edges slightly eased.
The use of resawn used mill framing obtained from demolition companies
is recommended in order to obtain straight grain. Architect must be
submitted samples of flooring for his approval before use. No pieces
shorter than eight feet will be used, except where necessary at
juncture of floor & wall. All stair treads shall be of 1' 8" thick
clear yellow pine, bull-nosed.
All interior woodwork to be of clear western white pine, S 4 S, of
thickness as shown on plans.
Wainscot shall be of 3/4' thick by 3-5/8", 5-1/2" & 7-1/2" clear white
pine, tongue & grooved, with a 1/4" bead on one face edge.
Doors, windows (sash & jamb) & balusters will be of clear western
white pine. Front door jamb shall be of 1-5/8 th. clear yellow pine.
Interior jambs of 1-1/8" th. Cl. yellow pine.
Pew material to be of 1-1/8" clear yellow pine, S 4 S.
Rails to be birch for staining.
Moisture content for all to be no greater than 12%.
_FOUNDATION WORK_--Point up all existing foundations, piers, footings,
etc. in basement and crawl space.
Replace all supporting beams rotted or otherwise unsuitable for
re-use.
Excavate existing crawl space to a minimum of three feet below joists,
and cover with 2-1/2-3" thick broom finished concrete slab, on 4 mil
polyethylene film.
Move existing basement stair to location on plan, and floor-over
opening thus made to top of stairs.
_MASONRY_--Carefully remove several sample face bricks from existing
sidewalls, clean all but weather-face, and submit to Locher Brick Co.,
Glasgow, Va. for duplication.
Remove segmental arches above two storey window openings, and extend
window openings to same height as those of porch chamber windows.
Using existing downstairs window sills, brick-in two rough openings
required by new windows. Set steel lintels as called for on plan, and
brick between vertical window openings. Take care that the new
brickwork appears continuous with existing masonry & is properly
toothed & bonded. Architect shall approve colour of mortar and
duplicated brick before setting in place.
Repoint or rebuild existing chimneys & fireplaces. Build new hearths
of duplicated brick for downstairs fireplaces.
Repoint all existing brickwork, interior & exterior, as may be
requisite.
_WEATHERSTRIPPING_--All double-hung windows shall be weatherstripped
with "Chamberlain" No. 100-A Zinc Heavy-Duty, full-sash units, with
protection at head, meeting rail & sill.
Front entrance door shall have spring bronze weatherstripping all
around, except at sill which is to receive "Chamberlain" No. 869-A
narrow brass threshhold with No. 826 bronze door hook.
_INSULATION_--Entire building to be covered with 4" thick batts of
rock-wool or fibre-glass, combination aluminum foil insulation,
applied immediately over lath between ceiling joists.
_PAINTING & DECORATING_--All woodwork, interior or exterior, shall be
back primed with white lead before erection.
All exterior woodwork to receive two coats of white lead in oil.
Remove loose or heavy accumulations of paint from existing woodwork
before painting.
All interior woodwork to receive one coat of primer, one coat half
primer & half enamel & finish coat of semi-gloss enamel.
Plaster surfaces, when thoroughly dry, shall be washed with zinc
sulphate neutralizer. First paint coat shall be wall size and primer.
Second coat two parts flat wall paint & one part size. Finish with
egg-shell wall paint. Plaster cornice to receive first coat of size,
second coat half size & half enamel. Finish coat semi-gloss enamel.
Architect shall select all colours.
_FLOOR FINISHING_--Floors shall be lightly sanded to remove stains and
imperfections & to reasonably level. Floors shall be stained, filled,
shellaced and waxed. Colour of stain shall be selected by architect.
_LATHING & PLASTERING_--All interior surfaces of exterior masonry
walls shall receive 3/8" gypsum lath securely nailed to 1" × 2" wood
furring strips anchored to masonry. Coat masonry before furring with
"Thoroseal" from Standard Dry Wall Products Co., New Eagle, Penna.
Entire ceiling to be lathed with high-rib metal lath securely nailed
directly to ceiling joists. Stud partitions to receive 3/8" gypsum
lath. Ceiling of porch to receive high-rib metal lath applied over
existing wood ceiling. All inside corners to receive expanded metal
cornerite. Outside corners to receive metal corner bead. Apply strips
of metal lath 6" wide over openings in stud partitions.
All plaster cornices shall be run in place and formed over heavy gauge
metal lath, with moulding plaster. All surfaces to be plastered
minimum 3/4" thick (including lath) in two coats; Brown & finish
white. White coat to have smooth float sand finish.
_GLAZING_--All windows to be glazed with 9" × 10-3/4" welded glass
edge or metal edged insulating glass one-half inch thick composed of
two sheets of 1/8" double strength "A" window glass with one-quarter
inch air space between. All glass to be set in frames with glaziers
points. Back-bed w/thin coating of elastic glazing compound and
putty-in smoothly.
_SCREENING_--All louvres in cupola to be back screened with fine mesh,
copper screen wire.
_FINISHED HARDWARE_--All hinges, locks, latches, shutter hardware,
etc. shall be selected by the architect. Allow $400.00 for finished
hardware.
LIST OF SOURCES
_BOOKS_
Black, J. B. _The Reign of Elizabeth, 1558-1603._ Oxford: Oxford
University, 1936.
Bruce, P. A. _Institutional History of Virginia in the Seventeenth
Century._ New York: Putnam, 1910.
Catton, Bruce. _A Stillness at Appomatox._ New York: Cardinal Giant
Edition, Pocket Books, Inc., 1958.
Clark, Sir Kenneth. _Civilisation._ New York: Harper & Row, 1969.
Cresswell, Nicholas. _The Journals of Nicholas Cresswell, 1774-1777._
Pt. Washington, N. Y.: Kennikat Press, 1968.
Davis, Jefferson. _The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government._
New York: Yoseloff, 1958.
Fairfax County Board of Supervisors. _Industrial and Historical Sketch
of Fairfax County, Virginia._ Fairfax: County Board of Supervisors,
1907.
Fairfax County Chamber of Commerce. _Historic, Progressive Fairfax
County in Old Virginia._ Alexandria: Newell-Cole. 1928.
Fennelly, Catherine. _The New England Village Scene: 1800._
Sturbridge: Old Sturbridge Village, 1955.
Fleming, Walter L. _The Sequel of Appomatox._ New Haven: Yale
University, 1921.
Fletcher, Sir Banister. _A History of Architecture._ New York:
Scribners, 1961.
Freeman, Douglas S. _George Washington: A Biography: Young
Washington._ New York: Scribner, 1948.
Hall, Wilmer, ed. _Executive Journals of the Council of Colonial
Virginia._ Richmond: Virginia State Library, 1945.
Harrison, Fairfax. _Landmarks of Old Prince William._ Richmond: Old
Dominion Press, 1924. Reprint Berryville, Va.: Chesapeake Book Co.,
1964.
Hiden, Martha. _How Justice Grew: Virginia Counties: An Abstract of
Their Formation._ Williamsburg: Virginia 350th Anniversary
Celebration, 1957.
_A Hornbook of Virginia History._ Richmond: Virginia State Library.
[1965].
Kuhlman, Charles. _The Development of the Flour-Milling Industry in
the United States._ Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1929.
Martin, Joseph. _Gazetteer of Virginia and the District of Columbia._
Charlottesville, 1835.
McDanel, Ralph. _The Virginia Constitutional Convention of 1891-92._
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1928.
McIlwaine, H. R., ed. _Journals of the House of Burgesses, 1742-49._
Richmond, 1909.
_Minutes of the Vestry, Truro Parish, Virginia, 1732-1785._ Lorton,
Va.: Pohick Church, 1974.
Moore, Gay M. _Seaport on the Potomac._ Richmond: Garrett & Massie,
1949.
Morison, Samuel E. and Commager, Henry S. _The Growth of the American
Republic._ New York: Oxford, 1937.
O'Neal, William. _Architecture in Virginia._ New York: Walker, 1968.
Payne, Lloyd. _The Miller in Eighteenth Century Virginia._
Williamsburg: Colonial Williamsburg, 1963.
Porter, Albert O. _County Government in Virginia._ New York: Columbia
University Press, 1947.
Powell, Mary G. _The History of Old Alexandria, Virginia from July 13,
1749 to May 24, 1861._ Richmond: William Byrd Press, 1928.
_Programme of the Virginia Good Roads Convention._ Roanoke: Stone
Printing Co. [1894].
Prussing, Eugene E. _The Estate of George Washington, Deceased._
Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1927.
Rives, William C. _History of the Life and Times of James Madison._
Boston: Little, Brown, 1873.
Roman, Alfred. _Military Operations of Gen. Beauregard._ New York:
Harper & Bros., 1884.
Rust, Jeanne. _History of the Town of Fairfax._ Washington: Moore &
Moore, 1960.
Steadman, Melvin. _Falls Church by Fence and Fireside._ Falls Church,
Va.: Falls Church Public Library, 1964.
Sydnor, Charles. _American Revolutionaries in the Making._ New York:
Collier, 1962.
Wayland, John. _History of Rockingham County, Virginia._ Dayton, Va.:
Ruebush-Elkins, 1912.
_ARTICLES_
Anderson, Robert. "The Administration of Justice in the Counties of
Fairfax, and Alexandria and the City of Alexandria." _Arlington
Historical Magazine_, II (1961): 1.
Andrews, Marshall. "A History of Railroads in Fairfax County."
_Yearbook of the Historical Society of Fairfax County_," III (1954):
30-31.
Burke, Elizabeth. "Our Heritage: A History of Fairfax County."
_Yearbook of the Historical Society of Fairfax County._ 1956-7.
Chapman, Thomas, Jr. "The Secession Election in Fairfax County, May
23, 1861." _Yearbook of the Historical Society of Fairfax County_, IV
(1955): 50.
Hyman, Sidney. "Empire of Liberty." _With Heritage So Rich._ New York:
Random House, 1966.
"Letters of George Mason to Zachariah Johnston." _Tyler's Quarterly
Review_, V. (January 1924.)
"Martha Washington's Will and the Story of its Loss and Recovery by
Fairfax County." _Yearbook of the Historical Society of Fairfax
County, Virginia_, II (1952-53): 40-62.
Moore, William C. "Jeremiah Moore: 1746-1815." _William and Mary
Quarterly_, 2d ser. XIII, 18, 21.
Smith, Governor William. "The Skirmish at Fairfax Court House." _The
Fairfax County Centennial Commission._ Vienna, Virginia: 1961.
_University of Virginia Newsletter._ Charlottesville: Institute of
Government, University of Virginia. XLIII (July 15, 1967): 1.
Whiffen, Marcus. "The Early Courthouses of Virginia." _Journal of the
Society of Architectural Historians._ XVIII (March 1959): 1.
_PUBLIC RECORDS_
Fairfax County Board of Supervisors _Annual Report_, 1969.
Fairfax County Board of Supervisors Minute Books
Fairfax County Court Minute Books
Fairfax County Deed Books
Fairfax County Record of Surveys, 1742-1850.
Northern Neck Grant Books
Virginia Laws
_INTERVIEWS AND UNPUBLISHED WORKS_
Architectural drawings, 1951-1956, Facilities Management Office,
County of Fairfax.
Artemel, Janice, "James Wren, Gentleman Joiner," (unpublished
manuscript) Falls Church, Va., 1976.
Chapman, Thomas. Fairfax County, Virginia. Interview, 13 February
1970.
Feiss, Carl. "Court Houses of Virginia," lecture. Latrobe (Washington)
Chapter, Society of Architectural Historians, 8 November 1968.
Macomber, Walter. Fairfax, Virginia. Interview, 2 March 1970.
Moger, Allen W. "The Rebuilding of the Old Dominion," (unpublished
doctoral dissertation) Columbia University, 1940.
Sprouse, Edith M., ed. Fairfax County Abstracts: Court Order Books
1749-1792.
_NEWSPAPERS_
_Alexandria Gazette_
_Columbia Mirror & Alexandria Advertiser_
_Fairfax County Free Press_
_Fairfax Herald_
_Fairfax News_
_Northern Virginia Sun_
_Virginia Gazette_
_Washington Post_
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
John F. Herrity, Chairman
Martha V. Pennino, Vice-Chairman
Joseph Alexander
Warren I. Cikins
Alan H. Magazine
Audrey Moore
James M. Scott
John P. Shacochis
Marie B. Travesky
HISTORY COMMISSION
Edith M. Sprouse, Chairman
Donie Rieger, Vice-Chairman
Bernard N. Boston
C. J. S. Durham
William Elkjer
Denzil O. Evans
Mary M. Fahringer
Ceres Gaskins
John P. Liberty
Virginia B. Peters
Mayo S. Stuntz
Charles Cecil Wall
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD
John J. Gattuso, Chairman
Glenn Ovrevik, Vice-Chairman
Thomas Cagley
Donald C. Cannon
Donald R. Chandler
Donovan E. Hower
Louis Papa
S. Richard Rio
James D. Webber
Mary M. Fahringer, ex officio
OFFICE OF COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING
Theodore J. Wessel, Director
Peter T. Johnson, Branch Chief
Nan Netherton, Historian
Elizabeth David, Historic Preservation Planner
Donald Sweig, Research Historian
Jay Linard, Copy Editor
Annette Thomas, Copy Preparation
Gloria Matthews, Designer
Robin Pedlar, Assistant
[Illustration: Back cover photo, court papers by Bernie Boston,
1976.]
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| TRANSCRIBER'S NOTE. |
| |
| Copyright material in the original (the image on p. 76) has been |
| omitted from this ebook. |
| |
| No anchors for footnotes 54 and 163 are present in the text. |
| |
| Discrepancies have been preserved between titles in the List Of |
| Illustrations and the illustrations themselves. |
| |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Fairfax County Courthouse, by
Ross D. Netherton and Ruby Waldeck
*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE FAIRFAX COUNTY COURTHOUSE ***
***** This file should be named 28750-8.txt or 28750-8.zip *****
This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
http://www.gutenberg.org/2/8/7/5/28750/
Produced by Mark C. Orton, Chris Logan and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
will be renamed.
Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules,
set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project
Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you
do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is
subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
redistribution.
*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
http://gutenberg.org/license).
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the
collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an
individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in
a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check
the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning
the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked
to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg-tm License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or
distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
that
- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is
owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments
must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
License. You must require such a user to return or
destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
Project Gutenberg-tm works.
- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
of receipt of the work.
- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the
Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with
the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy
is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists
because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at
809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
[email protected]. Email contact links and up to date contact
information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
page at http://pglaf.org
For additional contact information:
Dr. Gregory B. Newby
Chief Executive and Director
[email protected]
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To
SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
particular state visit http://pglaf.org
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
works.
Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily
keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
http://www.gutenberg.org
This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
