i ■ 
 
 
 .C2U53 
 
 [;\- .' :;; : ::;;i;:;;;:;K;;r : ;f: ; :; |:;H ':;:=:^ ; ;fE;fn^:' ; ;H;iI-5H?;^ '^:"n>f^^i ;-)f:jJv; f ;:; : ;':r^"';;fr=:ir*f;5ii:;'^ ;:j=/;f£; ; :?:i;/: h:r :H-:; ; -;!; 
 
 
 j.-' /i!:liiBS13SI=;iil;Si : ;';iBl^ 
 
 
 
 
• 
 
 
 
 
 , v . % 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 cv 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 (3 
 
 
 c° 
 
 ,* % 
 
 '\ 
 
 
 <y -o 
 
 
 * 
 
 :" A ^0 V 
 
 " *V 
 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 /V 
 
 
 1 
 V 
 
 *o 
 
 
 
 M *••'■«* 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 ,1 o. 
 
 I 
 
 A <> V 
 
 
,6* 
 
 * ♦ 
 
 /■& 1 
 
 
 V ' 
 
 ■4? *^VJ*'* ^ 
 
 
 
 V r 
 
 <P- * ° M ° 
 
 
 ,&* *o, ^T* A O -o..* G v 
 
 o 
 • ^ i* *AW/k* ^ c* 
 
 JP^ 
 
 4 o 
 
 
 
60th Congress, \ HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, j Report 
 2d Session. ( 1 No. 2215. 
 
 HALL OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 
 
 February 15, 1909.— Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the stale 
 of the Union and ordered to be printed. 
 
 Mr. McCadl, from the Committee on the Library, submitted the 
 
 following 
 
 REPORT. 
 
 [To accompany H. J. Res. 260.] 
 
 The Committee on the Library, to whom was referred the report 
 of the Superintendent of the Capitol Building and Grounds on the 
 proposed remodeling of the Hall of the House of Representatives, 
 have considered the same and report the accompanying joint resolu- 
 tion and recommend its passage. 
 
 On the 12th of May, 1908, the House passed a resolution directing 
 the Superintendent of the Capitol to consult with architects of repute 
 and experts upon ventilation and acoustics with a view to a rearrange- 
 ment and reconstruction of the Hall of the House of Representatives, 
 to place it in direct contact with the outer wall or walls of the building, 
 to improve its ventilation and acoustical properties, and to reduce 
 its size, and to report with plans to the Speaker on the first Monday 
 of December, 1908. 
 
 Under the said resolution the superintendent has reported with 
 plans to the Speaker, which report and plans have been referred to 
 the Committee on the Library. A copy of said report is hereto 
 appended. 
 
 The superintendent presents three schemes, marked "A," "B," 
 and "C." The last scheme need not be considered, as its adoption 
 was not recommended by the superintendent, but was made to show 
 that the subject had been "exhaustedly studied and all possible 
 arrangements for the new hall considered." 
 
 Scheme A presents a plan hemicycle in form, alter the style of the 
 old Hall of the House of Representatives, now Statuary Hall, and of 
 substantially the same size. While this scheme is preferable archi- 
 tecturally, the superintendent stated to the committee that for all 
 practical purposes scheme B would be as good as scheme A. The 
 acoustic properties of a hemicycle can not be accurately determined 
 in advance of the const ruction. The acoustic- of the old Hall re- 
 
2 BALL OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. aP A? 
 
 f erred to above were not satisfactory, hut this was due very likely 
 to certain detail- of its structure rather than to its form. But the 
 superintendent i> confident tiiat there would be no difficulty regard- 
 ing the acoustical properties of a rectangular hall as presented in 
 scheme B. Furthermore, the gallery area of the hemicycle is as great 
 as that of the present hall. The committee believe that another ob- 
 jection to the hemicycle scheme would be that we should have side by 
 side in the Capitol two halls of the same type and practically of the 
 same size. 
 
 For these reasons, among others, the committee favor scheme B. 
 This plan involves a hall rectangular in shape, like the present Hall 
 of the House, but surrounded by pillars and with other details of 
 treatment which make it architecturally a very great improvement 
 over the present Hall. The following table will give the comparative 
 dimensions and other data as between the existing Hall and scheme B : 
 
 Comparative data. 
 
 Greatest length on the lloor 
 
 Greatest brealth on the lloor 
 
 Length at gallery level 
 
 Breadth at gallery level 
 
 Area on the floor sq. ft . 
 
 Area at gallery level do 
 
 Cubic contents, including gallery cu. ft.. 
 
 Number of Members' seats 
 
 Total cloakroom space, not including present lobby on south front sq. ft. . 
 
 The exist- 
 ing Hall. 
 
 Scheme B. 
 
 113J 87 
 
 64 
 
 lo9 118 
 
 93 115 
 
 7, (WO - r >, 440 
 
 12,927 9,618 
 
 259, 745 
 
 446 
 
 3,441 [ 7,170 
 
 The above yields the following results for scheme B, as compared with the existing 
 Hall: 
 
 Reduction in area on the floor . sq. ft . . 2, 220 
 
 Reduction in area at the gallery level do :'.. 31 1 
 
 Reduction in cubic contents of Hall cu. ft . L26, 625 
 
 Increase in seating 53 
 
 Increase in cloakroom space sq. ft . . 3, 729 
 
 The cost of executing scheme B is estimated at $375,000. 
 
 It will be-seen that scheme B affords a reduction in area on the 
 floor level of 2,220 square feet and on the gallery level of 3,211 square 
 feet; t hat it reduces the entire cubical contentsof the Hall from 386,370 
 feet to 259,745 feet, or almost exactly one-third, and that it increases 
 the cloakroom space by 3,729 feet. Greatly as the Hall would be 
 reduced, it would still remain one-third Larger than the Senate 
 Chamber. 
 
 The seating arrangements under scheme B would admit of the use 
 of ample individual chairs, as in the Senate, or chairs joined together 
 and continuous between the aisles. 
 
 The committee regard the former as preferable. There would 
 also be an extended rack in front of each row of chairs, giving each 
 Member a place upon which to write and a desk, or pocket. Large 
 enough to hold several volumes. This scheme moves the Hall to 
 the south and eliminates the corridor directly back of the Speaker's 
 desk. The Hall would then open directly upon the Members' lobby, 
 fronting upon the south portico, and the press gallery would be 
 directly over the present Members' lobby, and the rear of the 
 
 3 1909 
 
 F 9 lb 
 
 D, oi D. 
 
HALL OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 6 
 
 press gallery would be along the south front of the House wing, with 
 five windows directly opening into the outer air. From the state- 
 ment of the superintendent to the committee, it appears that this 
 direct connection of the Hall with the outer air through the press 
 gallery and through the openings connecting the Hall with the pres- 
 ent Members' lobby, which itself is connected with the outer air, 
 would meet all reasonable desire for direct ventilation from the 
 outside. 
 
 The superintendent expressed the opinion thai any further direct 
 connection with the outer air would be objectionable. The artificial 
 .system of ventilation would also continue and would be fully as 
 effective as in the present Hall. The Speaker's desk would occupy 
 the same relative position as in the present Hall. Upon the north 
 side of the Hall, in addition to the public corridor, there would be a 
 private lobby running the whole length of the II all and nearly 30 
 feet in width, a portion of which could well be used as reception 
 rooms where the Members could see visitors, instead of in the public 
 corridors as is now done. 
 
 The cloakroom space at the two ends of the Mall would also be 
 greatly increased, and some of the additional space might be made 
 use of for a reference library. The committee has not attempted to 
 prescribe the exact uses to which the great additional cloakroom space 
 should be devoted, but that could be determined upon by the House 
 itself in some suitable way if it should order the change to be made. 
 
 In the opinion of the committee the great advantage of scheme B 
 over the present Hall would be in substituting a hall suited in size 
 for a parliamentary body for a hall which, by reason of its enormous 
 magnitude, can by no possibility be regarded as a suitable place for 
 the deliberations of an assembly transacting business of vital conse- 
 quence to a great nation. It is only necessary to recall the dimensions 
 of the present Hall. In greatest length it is 139 feet, in breadth 93 
 feet, and its cubical contents are 386,370 feet.. The daily experience 
 of Members demonstrates to every one of them its unfitness, on 
 account of its size, for purposes of deliberation. There is no critic 
 of repute who has written about the House of Representatives who 
 has not commented upon the inordinate dimensions of the Hall of the 
 House and its adverse effect upon debate and deliberation. 
 
 Mr. Bryce, in his American Commonwealth, gives a lively and yet 
 a correct description of the debating conditions in the House. 
 Speaking of the Hall, he says: 
 
 ). It is more than thrice as large as the English House of Commons, with a floor about 
 equal in area to that of ^'estniinster Hall, 139 feet long by 93 feet wide and 36 feet 
 high. * * * The proportions are so good that it is not till you observe how small 
 a man looks at the farther end, and how faint ordinary voices sound, that you realize 
 its vast size. * * * 
 
 ■\Yhen you enter, your first impression is of noise and turmoil, a noise like that of 
 short, sharp waves in a Highland loch fretting under a squall against a rocky shore. The 
 raising and dropping of desk lids, the scratching of pens, the clapping of hands to call 
 the pages— keen little boys who race along the gangways— the pattering of many feet, 
 the hum of talkingon the floor and in the galleries, make up a din over which the Speaker 
 with the sharp taps of his hammer, or the orators straining shrill throats, find it hard to 
 make themselves audible. I never heard American voices sound so harsh or disagree- 
 able as they do here. Nor is it only the noise that gives the impression of disorder. 
 Often three or four members are on their feet at once, each shouting to catch the 
 Speaker's attention. * * * Less favorable conditions for oratory can not be imag- 
 ined, and one is not surprised to be told that debate was more animated and practical 
 in' the much smaller room which the House formerly occupied. 
 
4 HALL OF THK HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 
 
 Not only is the present room bo hie that only a powerful and well-trained voice can 
 (ill it. lmt the desk and chairs make a speaker feel as if he were addressing furniture 
 rather than men. while of the Members few seem to listen to the speeches. It is true 
 that they sit in the House instead of running out in the lobbies, a- people do in the 
 British House of Commons, but they are more occupied in talking or writing or reading 
 newspapers than in attending to the debate. To attend is not easy, for only a shrill 
 voice can overcome the murmurous roar; and one sometimes finds the newspapers, 
 in describing an unusually effective speech, observe that "Mr. Bo-and-So'e speech 
 drew li teners about him from all parts of the House." They could not hear him 
 where they --at. so they left their places to crowd in the gangways near him. "Speak- 
 ing in the House," says an American writer, 'is like trying to address the people in 
 the Broadway omnibuses from the curbstone in front of the Astor House * * * . " 
 
 .Men of fine intellect and of good ordinary elocution have exclaimed in despair that 
 in the House of Representatives the mere physical effort to he heard uses up all the 
 powers, so that intellectual action becomes impossible. The natural refuge is in 
 written speeches or in habitual silence, which one dreads more and more to break. 
 
 It is hard to talk calm good sense at the top of your voice, hard to unfold a compli- 
 cated measure. A speaker's vocal organs react upon his manner, and his manner on 
 the substance of his speech. It is also hard to thunder at an unscrupulous majority 
 or a factious minority when they do not sit opposite to you, but all around you anil 
 behind you, as is the case in the House. The Americans think this an advantage, 
 because it prevents scenes of disorder. They may be right, lmt what order trains 
 oratory loses. It is admitted that the desks are a mistake, as encouraging inatten- 
 tion by enabling men to write their letters, but though nearly everybody agrees that 
 they would be better away nobody supposes that a proposition to remove* them would 
 Hucceed. 
 
 So far n the committee are informed the opinion of writers of 
 repute upon this subject is all one way. But since it has cited a very 
 great British authority, it will now quote from an eminent American 
 writer, President Woodrow Wilson. In his hook on Congressional 
 government If says: 
 
 There are. to begin with, physical and architectural reasons why businesslike 
 debate of public affaire by the House of Representatives is oul of the question. To 
 those who visit the galleries of the representative < hamber during a session of the 
 House these reasons are as obvious as they are astonishing. 
 
 It would be natural to expect that a body which meets ostensibly for consultation 
 and deliberation should hold its sittings in a room small enough to admit of any easy 
 interchange of views and a ready concert of action, where its members would be brought 
 into close, sympathetic contact: and it is nothing less than astonishing to find it spread 
 at large through the vast spaces of such a chamber as the Hall of the House of Repre- 
 sentatives, where there are no close ranks of cooperating parties, but each Member 
 has a roomy desk and an easy revolving chair; where broad aisles spread and stretch 
 themselves; where ample, soft-Carpeted areas lie about the spacious desks of the 
 Speaker and clerks; where deep galleries reach back from the outer limits of the wide 
 passages which lie beyond "the bar:" an immense, capacious chamber, disposing its 
 giant dimensions freely beneath the great level lacunar ceiling through whose glass 
 panels the full light of day pours in. The most vivid impression the visitor gets 
 in looking over that vast hall is the impression of space. 
 
 A speaker must needs have a voice like O'Connell's, the practical visitor is apt to 
 think as he sits in the gallery, to till even the silent spaces of that room; how much 
 more to overcome the disorderly noises that buzz and rattle through it when the 
 Representatives are assembled a voice clear, sonorous, dominant, like the voice of a 
 clarion. One \vh<> speaks there with the voice and lungs of the ordinary mortal 
 must content himself with the audience of 1 hose Members in his own immediate 
 neighborhood, whose ears he rudely assails in \ ehemenl efforts to command the atten- 
 tion of those beyond him. and who. therefore, can not choose but hear him. 
 
 Taking the history of Congress from the beginning, no reason cun 
 he found in the relative ability of the membership of the Senate and 
 of the House why debate in the former body should better meet the 
 ends of discussion. Most oi the greatest Senators have served for a 
 time, and some of them for many years, in the [louse of Representa- 
 tives. IleniN Clay made some of his greatest speeches in this body. 
 The same may he -aid of Webster, and especially with regard to his 
 
HALL OF THE HOUSE OF BEPEESBNTATIVES. 
 
 speeches on the Greek revolution and the tariff. John Quincy Adams 
 had a very brief career in the Senate and a long and active period of 
 service in the House at a time when his public influence was aug- 
 mented by the fact that he had been President of the United States. 
 
 Many of the notable men in the history of the country have been 
 identified with the House of Representatives and have never served 
 in the Senate. Among the Presidents may be named Madison, 
 Lincoln, Garfield, and McKinley, and among the many other eminent 
 men who served in the House but never in the Senate may be men- 
 tioned Fisher Ames. Henry Winter Davis, Thaddeus Stevens, Ran- 
 dolph Tucker, William L. Wilson, and Thomas B. Reed. 
 
 In former times, when the House assembled in the smaller Chamber, 
 its debates exercised an influence which they have not enjoyed since 
 it moved into the present Hall, and, as I have said, it is not because 
 the people are in the habit of choosing men of inferior ability to its 
 membership. 
 
 Neither Mr. Bryce nor Mr. Wilson has overdrawn the picture in what 
 I have cited from them. Except upon rare occasions, and when the 
 speaker has a powerful or penetrating voice, one can hear little or 
 nothing of what is going on. 
 
 A Member is not able ordinarily to hear unless he has a seat near 
 the one who is speaking. There are not a half dozen Members of 
 the House able to make themselves heard throughout the Hall when 
 speaking in a conversational tone, which is the only tone really 
 suited to deliberation. Members are compelled to assume the grand, 
 oratorical style, and to shout and declaim. The committee believe 
 that the adoption of some such plan as that proposed in scheme B 
 is necessary to the highest efficiency of the House of Representatives 
 as a legislative body, and they therefore urge the passage of the 
 accompanying resolution. 
 
 [House Doi-uiAent No. 1428. Sixtieth Congress, second session.] 
 
 Office Superintendent, 
 l". S. < Capitol Building and Grounds, 
 
 Washington, D. C, December 7, 1908. 
 
 Sir: On the 12th day of May, 11>08, the chairman of the Committee on the Library 
 submitted to the House the following resolution, which was passed: 
 
 "Resolved, That the Superintendent of the Capitol Building and Grounds be author- 
 ized and directed, under the supervision of the Speaker, to consult with architects of 
 repute and expert upon ventilation and acoustics with a view to a rearrangement 
 and reconstruction of the Hall of the House of Representatives, and to place it in 
 direct contact with the outer wall or walls of the building, and to improve its ventila- 
 tion and acoustical properties, and to reduce its size, and to report with plans to the 
 Speaker on the first Monday of December, nineteen hundred and eight. The expenses 
 hereunder, not to exceed the sum of five thousand dollars, shall be paid out of the 
 contingent fund of the House." 
 
 In accordance with the above resolution I beu to submit herewith the report 
 requested. This report is accompanied by drawings, schedules, and other data, and 
 I beg to state further that, during the consideration of this matter, 1 have consulted 
 with Messrs. Garrere & Hastings, of New York, the consulting architects of the House 
 and Senate Office Buildings. 
 
 The three schemes submitted herewith have been marked, for purposes of identifi- 
 cation, as "A," "B," and "C."° They exhibit two types of auditorium, either of 
 which may be adopted. 
 
 Scheme A illustrates a semicircular (hemicycle) hall, similar to Statuary Hall in 
 the Capitol building. 
 
 " Schemes not printed . 
 
f) HALL OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 
 
 Scheme B illustrates a rectangular hall, similar in form to the existing Hall of the 
 Bouse but of smaller dimensions. In this scheme the long dimension of the hall is 
 east and west, as in the existing Hall. 
 
 Scheme i ' also illustrates a rectangular hall, but turned around so its long dimension 
 is mirth and south, or at righl angles with the long dimension of the existing Hall. 
 
 These three schemes diner in form and architectural treatment, but they all agree 
 on the following points: 
 
 A uniform Beating arrangement ; a reduction in the size of the Hall, and the moving 
 of the Hall bodily to the south so as to eliminate the corridor back of the Speaker's desk 
 in the existing Hall, in that way bringing the south wall of the new hall as close to 
 the outer wall of the House wing as the limitation- of the existing structural and 
 supporting walls will admit. 
 
 To facilitate comparisons, there i.- also presented, as part of hi report, a schedule 
 containing the dimensions, area-, seating, etc., of the existing Ball of the Boue 
 compared with each of the three schemes presented for its reconstruction. 
 
 To further facilitate a comparison of the drawings it may be stated thai all have been 
 made lo the uniform scale of 10 feet lo 1 inch. 
 
 During the preparation of the drawings a careful examination was made of a num- 
 ber of document- relating to European legislative halls. These documents, consisting 
 of plans, photographs, etc. were obtained for reference in connection with the study 
 of this subject by the chairman of the Committee on the Library, Hon. S. W. Met 'all. 
 
 The following legislative halls are illustrated in the documents collected by Mr. 
 .Met all: 
 
 England. The Bouse of Peers, in London; the House of Commons, in London. 
 
 France. The Chamber of Deputies, in Paris. 
 
 Germany. The Reichstag building, in Berlin; the' two Prussian legislative houses, in 
 Berlin. 
 
 Belgium. The Senate Chamber, in Brussels; the chamber of Representatives, in 
 Brussels. 
 
 Austria. The two Legislative halls of the Austrian Parliament, in Vienna. 
 
 Italy.- The two Legislative halls of the Italian Parliament, in Pome. 
 
 Spain. — The Chamber of Deputies, in Madrid. 
 
 Holland. — The First chamber of the States-General, at the Bague; the Second 
 Chamber of the States-* ieneral, at the Ha. 
 
 Portugal. The Chamber of Peers, at Lisbon. 
 
 Switzerland. The Hall of the National Council, in Heme. 
 
 Greece. — The Meeting Hall of the Parliament of the Hellene-. 
 
 All of the studies made for contemplated changes in the present Hall of the House 
 during previous years concerned themselves entirely with the House floor, and 
 apparently did not take into consideration structural questious involved below the 
 floor of the present Hall, the necessity for new foundations, or the probability of any 
 scheme being adopted which would require the reconstruction of the roof over the 
 Hall. 
 
 In preparing the present studies, due consideration has been given to all these 
 questions. 
 
 It can be definitely stated that no successful scheme for remodeling the Hall of the 
 House can be devised which will avoid the necessity of providing new foundations 
 for at least a portion of the new inclosing walls of the Hall. This will necessarily 
 result in a partial, or total, reconstruction of the interior of the House wing within the 
 limits of the walls surrounding the galleries of the present Hall. 
 
 The roof trusses that now span the Hall of the House date from L854, and it is doubt- 
 ful if any Bcheme of reconstructing the Hall could be executed without necessitating 
 new trusses. In order to expeditiously prosecute the work it would probably be 
 necessary to remove the roof. The existing trusses are of such character and material 
 that if they were removed it would very probably be impossible lo successfully 
 reerect them, and it may therefore be stated that any of the schemes for the recon- 
 struction of the Hall will necessitate a new roof over the center portion of the House 
 wing. 
 
 The subjects of ventilation and acoustics and their relation to the proposed change 
 in the Hall of the House may be safely left to present day engineering skill and sci- 
 entific knowledge, which, I believe, will be fully able to cope successfully with the 
 problem- presented. 
 
 In the majority of the European legislative halls referred to abme the -eat- are 
 arranged in concentric rows as in the existing Hall of the House. In form these 
 European Legislative halls are about equally divided between the hemicycle type 
 and the rectangular I 
 
HALL OF THE HOUSE OE REPRESENTATIVES. i 
 
 The arrangement of seats in concentric rows being so obviously well adapted to the 
 purpose, it has been considered unnecessary to attempt any departure from this plan. 
 The only conspicuous exceptions to the concentric plan of pea ting among the European 
 halls referred to are the British Houses of Parliament. The seating in these halls 
 consists of rows of straight benches placed around, and parallel to, the inclosing walls 
 of the rectangular rooms. This scheme offers no advantages that would recommend it 
 for the new Hall of the House, and therefore, as intimated above, no plan is presented 
 embodying it. 
 
 In determining the area of the proposed new Hall of the House the seating capacity 
 was taken at between 400 and 450 individual seats. 
 
 As to the seats themselves, they have been arranged in rows spaced 39 inches from 
 back to back, with a width of 24 inches for each seal . This allows 64 square feet of 
 actual floor space to each Member, exclusive of aisles, Speaker's desk, etc. The 
 spacing given will permit of a writing space in front of each seat in the form of a con- 
 tinuous ledge secured to the backs of the rows of seats. There is presented herewith 
 a study intended to exhibit the general arrangement of the rows of individual seats, 
 with arms, and the continuous writing ledge. 
 
 Attention is particularly called to the fact, as shown by this study, that the proposed 
 seating of the new Hall of the House does not contemplate a system of benches, but 
 consists of a system of individual chairs, coupled together. 
 
 The rows of seats in the existing Hall of the House are spaced 60 inches from back to 
 back, with a width of 26 inches. This allows about 10^ square feet of actual floor space 
 to each Member. 
 
 The following tabulation will show that while the seating in the proposed new Hall 
 of the House allots less actual floor space to each Member than in the existing Hall, 
 it is, nevertheless, a considerably greater allowance per seat than is considered ample 
 in the most commodious auditoriums: 
 
 Auditorium. 
 
 The existing Hall of the Bouse of Representatives. 
 
 The proposed new Hal] of the House of Representative: 
 
 The New Theater in New York City 
 
 The Metropolitan Opera House in New York City 
 
 The Manhattan < >pera Iloi.se m New York City. 
 
 The above data on the seating in the New Theater, the Metropolitan Opera House, 
 and the Manhattan Opera House was obtained through the courtesy of Messrs. Carrere 
 & Hastings, the architects of the New Theater. They state that as a result of the 
 study they made of the seating question in the New Theater they are of the opinion 
 that a width of 24 inches would be a generous allowance for the seats in the new Hall 
 of the House. 
 
 Reducing the spacing of the rows of seats in the proposed new Hall will result, of 
 course, in bringing the membership of the House closer together. This result will be 
 obtained, however, without any sacrifice in the necessary working space now allotted 
 to each Member and without interfering with his personal convenience. 
 
 The principal gain in space is obtained by the substitution of the continuous writing 
 ledge for the de.^ks in the existing Hall. In addition, the proposed scheme of seats 
 provides one arm between each two adjoining seats instead of two separate arms 
 with a gap between. Thus it will be seen that while a very considerable gain in space 
 is obtained, permitting of a material reduction in the area of the Hall, it is done without 
 in any way lessening the actual size or convenience of the existing seats. 
 
 The following is a detailed description of each of the three schemes presented here- 
 with : &i 
 
 Scheme A. 
 
 . 
 
 This scheme, as stated above, embodies the hemicyele form of auditorium. The 
 curved inclosing walls are concentric with rows of seats. All points on the perim- 
 eter of the inclosing walls are equidistant from the Speaker's desk. This fact alone 
 marks the hemicyele form as the ideal one for the use of a deliberative body. 
 
 The dimensions of scheme A, on the floor, are virtually identical with Statuary Hall 
 in the Capitol Building, the depth of the galleries, however, being greater. 
 
 In this scheme, as in the others, the new Hall is moved south so as to eliminate the 
 corridor that is back of the Speaker's desk in the existing Hall. The new Hall would 
 
8 ISL OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVE. 
 
 then open directly on the Members' lobby facing the south portico of the House wing 
 The lower part of th ewall between the new Hall and the Members' Lobby on the south 
 would remain, except for the cutting of any new openings that may be required. 
 Through these could be seen the windows opening on the south portico of the House 
 wing. Any glare of light from these windows could be regulated by means of curtains, 
 and in warm weather the windows could be opened, admitting the outside air directly 
 into the Hall. 
 
 The upper portion of the division wall referred to would be removed and back of this 
 open space would be placed the Press Gallery, over the Members' Lobby. The 
 accompanying section of the new Hall marked "looking south" shows the effect which 
 will be gained by removing the upper portion of the present wall between the Mem- 
 bers' Lobby on the south and the corridor that now exists back of the Speaker's desk. 
 The windows that show on this section will be at the back of the new Press Gallery over 
 the Members' Lobby and are the actual upper windows that now open on the south 
 portico of the House \\ ing. This removal of the upper portion of the division wall, 
 referred to. will serve to further accomplish the expressed objecl of opening the new 
 Hall to the exterior light and air. 
 
 The moving of the Mall to the south and the use of the hemicycle form would pro- 
 vide a yen Large semicircular lobby hack of, and inclosing, the Hall. While the 
 extent of this lobby is shown on the accompanying drawings of scheme A it has not 
 been subdivided into cloakrooms, retiring rooms, etc. Anj desired subdivision of 
 this Lobbj space can be readily pro\ ided for. 
 
 The public gallery is directly over the Members' Lobby last referred to and is also 
 inclosed by a circular wall. 
 
 The plan of the gallery as shown leaves two large triangular spaces, one in the north- 
 east corner and the other in the northwest corner, back of the gallery inclosing wall. 
 It is designed to utilize these large spaces as Light courts, with skylights overhead. 
 This will permit of the introduction of daylight in the corresponding corners of the 
 Members' Lobby below. Because of the Large dimensions of these spaces the volume 
 of light will be very considerable. This tight can be introduced into the circular 
 Members' Lobby by increasing the door openings shown between it and the triangular 
 spaces. 
 
 This plan provides a very largely increased cloakroom and lobbj space over the 
 existing accommodations. In addition, the lobby will separate the Hall from the 
 public corridor and will serve the same purpose as the lobby on the north of the Senate 
 Chamber, between the latter and the Marble Room. The lobby will also serve as a 
 sort of vestibule at the north entrance ami will relieve the congestion thai now fre- 
 quently occurs at this point. 
 
 Comparative data. 
 
 The exist- 
 ing Hall. 
 
 Scheme A. 
 
 I1:U 
 
 90 
 
 67) 
 
 66 
 
 139 
 
 145 
 
 
 112 
 
 7,660 
 
 5.028 
 
 386,370 
 
 
 
 
 3,441 
 
 1 
 
 vi.wr, 
 
 15,511 
 
 Greatest length on the door Feet. . 
 
 GreaU'si breadth on the floor do 
 
 do — 
 
 (i i at gallery level do — 
 
 on the floor sq. fl 
 
 Cubic contents. Including gallery cu. ft. . 
 
 Number ol id 
 
 'in' ii pace, not including present lobby on south front sq. ft . 
 
 Area at gallery level do 
 
 The al ds the following results for Bcheme A. as compared with the existing 
 
 Hall: 
 
 Ibi but ion ii. area on the floor of the Mall sq. ft 2, 632 
 
 Reduction in area on (he gallery Level do. . . . 416 
 
 Reduction in total cubic contents of the Mall cu. ft. . 87. 970 
 
 Increase in seating ">7 
 
 Increase in clo pace sq. ft. . 3,921 
 
 The cosl oi exe< uting scheme A is estimated al $500,0Q0. 
 
 HEME lb 
 
 This Bche ill he rectangular form of auditorium. The proportions of the 
 
 Mall are similar to the existing Mall, but the room is of considerably smaller dimensions. 
 The Long dimension of (he Mall i-^ placed easl and west, the same as in the existing 
 Mall. 
 
HALL, OF THE HOUSE OE KEPEESENTATIVES. 
 
 9 
 
 This scheme moves the Hall to the south, by eliminating the corridor back of the 
 Speaker's desk, in the same manner as proposed in scheme A, and it also increases 
 the cloakroom space. 
 
 In this scheme, as in scheme A, the two tiers of windows that open on the south 
 portico of the House wing will be visible from the interior of the new Hall. 
 
 The accompanying drawings show that the rectangular form of auditorium is not so 
 well adapted to the concentric arrangement of seats as the hemicycle form. 
 
 Aside from the above criticism, scheme B would admit of perfectly successful archi- 
 tectural treatment and would cost somewhat less to execute than scheme A. 
 
 Comparative data. 
 
 Greatesl I mgtti on the floor - 
 
 Greatest breadth on the floor 
 
 Length at gallery level 
 
 Breadth at gallery level 
 
 Area on 1he floor sq. ft. 
 
 Area at gallery level do. . . 
 
 Cubic contents, including sjallery cu. ft. 
 
 Number of Members' seats 
 
 Total cloakroom space, qo1 including present lobby on south front sq. ft. 
 
 The exist- 
 ing Hall. 
 
 im 
 
 67i 
 
 l.:9 
 
 93 
 
 7,6£0 
 
 12,927 
 
 386, c70 
 
 S93 
 
 3. 441 
 
 87 
 
 64 
 
 US 
 
 115 
 
 5, 440 
 
 9,616 
 
 259,745 
 
 446 
 
 7,170 
 
 The above yields the following results for scheme B, as compared with the existing 
 Hall: 
 
 Reduction in area on the floor sq. ft. . 2, 220 
 
 Reduction in area at the gallery level do 3,311 
 
 Reduction in cubic contents of Hall cu. ft. . 126, 625 
 
 Increase in seating 53 
 
 Increase in cloakroom space sq. ft . . 3, 729 
 
 The cost of executing scheme B is estimated at $375,000. 
 
 Scheme C. 
 
 Scheme C illustrates a rectangular Hall, but differs from scheme B in that its long 
 dimension is north and south, while in the other the long dimension is east and west. 
 In other words, scheme C would turn the Hall of the House at right angles to the exist- 
 ing Hall. 
 
 The one advantage this scheme seems to offer is that the east wall of the new Hall 
 would be directly over an existing wall in the story below, which latter could be used 
 as a foundation should it be found that it would safely carry the additional weight 
 which would be imposed upon it by the new construction. 
 
 In this scheme, as in schemes A and B, the two tiers of windows that open on the 
 south portico of the House wing will be visible from the interior of the new Hall. 
 
 Scheme C has several serious objections, practically as well as architecturally. 
 
 It will be noticed that in this scheme the Hall is entered on the north immediately 
 from the public corridor without even the small vestibule that now exists being inter- 
 posed between the two. Further, this entrance is in the center of a short side of the 
 room; it is not opposite the Speaker's desk and is, therefore, in a subordinate location. 
 In actual use there would probably result much annoyance to the Members occupy- 
 ing the seats close to this entrance not only from drafts, but from the disturbing sounds 
 that would enter the Hall from the public corridor each time the door was opened. 
 
 With the Speaker's desk on the east wall, as shown on scheme C, and a large Mem- 
 bers' lobby immediately back of it, there would naturally be more or less "coming 
 and going" on that side of the room, which would tend to cause confusion and con- 
 gestion in the vicinity of the Chair. 
 
 To overcome the objections due to the abrupt entrance into the Hall on the north, 
 as shown on scheme (', a vestibule, as exists at present, might be introduced. This 
 would necessitate the retention of the existing north wall of the floor of the Hall in 
 order to conceal the vestibule. For the sake of symmetry it would then be necessary 
 to retain the corresponding south wall. This would result in a floor area insufficient 
 to meet the requirements as to seating. 
 
 Architecturally, scheme (' i< faulty. It turns the Hall around sidewise as regards 
 the lines and general conformation of the House Wing and would not have suggested 
 iteelf as a solution were it not for the fact that certain walls now in place offered them- 
 selves as possible supports. 
 
 H. Rep. 2215, 60-2 2 
 
10 
 
 HALL OF THE HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES. 
 
 f At present the Speaker's desk is on the south in the center of one of the long sides 
 of the Hall, with the main entrance directly opposite, and both are on the north and 
 south axis of the entire Capitol building. The two corresponding locations in the 
 Senate Chamber are in the same relation to each other. This is an arrangement that 
 every consideration of usage and design requires should remain undisturbed. 
 Scheme C, therefore, can not be recommended. 
 
 Comparative data. 
 
 Greatest length on the floor feet. . 
 
 Greatest breadth on the floor do 
 
 Length at the gallery level ao 
 
 Breadth at the gallery level do 
 
 Area on the floor sq. ft. . 
 
 Area at the gallery level do 
 
 Cubic contents, Including gallery cu. ft.. 
 
 Nmnl>er of Members' seats 
 
 Total cloakroom space, not including present lobby on south front sq. ft. . 
 
 The 
 
 existing 
 
 Hall. 
 
 113* 
 
 07 J 
 
 139 
 
 93 
 
 7,660 
 
 12, 927 
 
 386,370 
 
 393 
 
 3, 441 
 
 Scheme O. 
 
 94 
 
 04 
 
 112 
 
 112 
 
 0,016 
 
 11,950 
 
 305, £00 
 
 448 
 
 7,008 
 
 The above yields the following results for scheme C, as compared with the exist- 
 ing Hall: 
 
 Reduction in area on the floor sq. ft. . 1, 644 
 
 Reduction in area at the gallery level do 977 
 
 Reduction in total cubic contents of Hall cu. ft. . SO, 870 
 
 Increase in seating 55 
 
 Increase in cloakroom space sq. ft. . 3, 627 
 
 The cost of executing Bcheme I is estimated at $350,000. 
 
 Recapitulation of the estimated costs of the proposed reconstruction of the Hall of the 
 House of Representatives as shown on the accompanying schemes A, B, and C. 
 
 Scheme A $500, 000 
 
 Scheme B 375, 000 
 
 Scheme C 350. 000 
 
 Drawings accompanying this report. 
 
 Scheme A, plans and sections; 
 
 Scheme B, plans and sections; 
 
 Scheme (', plans and sections; 
 
 A schedule of the dimensions of each scheme as compared with the existing Hall 
 of the House; 
 
 A plat on which is shown the plan of the floor of each of the three schemes in its 
 relation to the floor of the existing Hall, together with the existing supporting walls 
 in the story below; 
 
 A detail of the proposed scheme of sealing in the new Hall of the House. 
 
 In conclusion, 1 beg to suggest that if it is determined to reconstruct the Hall of 
 the House of Representatives, the scheme thai is finally executed should be that one 
 which is agreed upon as the best, regardless of the r<<~]. 
 
 I am unable to recommend the adoption of scheme C. The drawings illustrating 
 this scheme are of interest as showing that the Bubject has been exhaustively studied 
 and all possible arrangements for the new Hall considered. Scheme C, however, 
 is not BO well adapted to the requirements of the House as the two Others, and. a- stated 
 above, it embodies serious faults architecturally. 
 
 The adoption of either scheme A or scheme I! would result successfully both from 
 a practical and an architectural standpoint. It is the opinion, however, of all those 
 who have examined into the subject that the hemicycle scheme, "A," offers the best 
 possible result. 
 
 Very respectfully, Elliott Woods, 
 
 - perintendent U.S. Capitol Building and Grounds. 
 
 The Sl'KAKKK OF THB HoUSK OK REPRESENTATIVES. 
 
 B 
 
 n Omitted in printing. 
 
 o 
 
r ^o 
 
 ,0y 
 
 
 
 r ^o 
 
 
 Hq 
 
 
 "o1 
 
O .V* o 
 
 
 
 
 
 / >. ** ^ - • 
 
 ^ •'^» VV °#! ^ 
 
 
 
 
 W 
 
 
 
 .0 
 
 ^ 
 
 t> * If > k™ 
 
 **y 
 
 > 
 
 '-v ^ 
 
 '*A 
 
 ,* . < . 
 
 v 
 
 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 
 & 
 
 c? 
 
 
 V . * • o. O 
 
 *■ x^ 
 
 v 
 
 A % 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 < 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 •' 0° 
 
 • : 
 
 
 *0 
 
 \ 
 
 
 
 ^ . V* 
 
 iV ^ 
 
 
 

 
 o 
 
 ^ - 
 
 "^ : MM° ***** -*Jfe- W -*i|lCtr, V** 
 
 ^"^ '.sSHnf:' ,v"^ ''W 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 111 III Ml 
 
 UII III 1 111 1 1 ill i ii • ' ■"" m 
 
 014 3691068 J