Talk:Supreme Court Gardens

Perth Water, stables, police station

The article currently says:

In the original state of Perth Water the current gardens did not exist, as Perth Water existed right ot he [sic] edge of the Supreme Court Buildings. The location had been the site of the Old Police Stables and Waterside police station.

This first sentence seems to imply (subject to what "ot he" was supposed to be) that the gardens did not exist because the water came right up to the Supreme Court building, but the second sentence says that stables and police station were at the location (of the gardens, in the water). I doubt we had water police back then, and the horses might have had a few problems with their accommodation, so perhaps some clarification is required. Possibly the stables and police were there some time after the land was reclaimed but before the gardens were established - in which case some indication of the time frames would be appropriate. Mitch Ames (talk) 03:31, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

"ot he" is fixed now, but neither that nor the new reference resolves the disparity between "Perth Water existed right to the edge of the Supreme Court Buildings" and "location had been the site of [stables and police station]". Mitch Ames (talk) 10:56, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Look at the Summers work that is cited - it is on the web - it will clarify things for you, and might even inspire some adding material from an online source satusuro 14:36, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

If you don't want to fix it yourself, that's fine - but please leave the tags in place until someone else can fix it. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:09, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

I've dated the stables and police station, but it would still be worth adding something explicit to the article about when the land was filled in. Also there's still a problem with the preceding sentence:

• Ref 1, Seddon & Ravine, is not online, so I can't check it.
• Ref 2, Summers, p41, establishes that the location of the current Gardens was part of Perth Water in c1838, but it does not show any Supreme Court building, so it does not support the statement that "Perth Water existed right to the edge of the Supreme Court Buildings".
• Ref 3, HRRC, purports to support the statement that "Perth Water existed right to the edge of the Supreme Court Buildings" - but the title of that ref (which is not online, so I can't check the image) is View from the foot of the Supreme Court Gardens ... - ie it's the view from something the Wikipedia article says did not exist! Perhaps they are different gardens - but the image is not online so I can't check.

Possibly Ref 2 and/or http://www.supremecourt.wa.gov.au/H/history.aspx and/or http://www.supremecourt.wa.gov.au/_files/Supreme_%20Court_history.pdf can help clarify the matter, but I don't have time to check them right now.

The Supreme Court history refs don't mention the construction of the gardens or the reclamation of the river. Mitch Ames (talk) 07:52, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

I've now seen Ref 1, Seddon & Ravine. That map (Fig 11:16, late 1880s) shows "Public Gardens" but these are to the north of the court, so probably not the current gardens. (Possibly they are Stirling Gardens.) The accompanying text does say "... before ... the reclamation of the Supreme Court Gardens". It does not show the water reaching "right to the edge of the Supreme Court buildings" - the police barracks and stables lie between the water and the court buildings. The matter is probably complicated by the fact that there are apparently three court buildings - the aforementioned map shows a "Courthouse" (described in the accompanying text as "the little Court-house of 1836 to the east") and a "Supreme Court" ("built in the early 1830s"). However the current building was apparently built in 1903 [1], although the original apparently "still exists next door to the current Supreme Court building" [2]. Mitch Ames (talk) 04:28, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

FYI we have an article on the original - Old Court House, Perth - it is now a law museum. The Drover's Wife (talk) 05:44, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. I've added it to See also, as well as updated a few other links between the articles. Mitch Ames (talk) 07:07, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

I've updated the article to more accurately reflect what Seddon & Ravine says. Note that this edit has removed a couple of refs (which, per my above comments weren't helping much), so most of the Ref numbers in my previous comments don't apply now. There's no scale on Seddon & Ravine's map so it's not clear how much of the current grounds were still under water. Evidently not all of them, because the map shows the police barracks and stables (south of the court buildings) - the water does not go all the way up to the court buildings. Mitch Ames (talk) 07:52, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Now I think it makes a bit more sense. (Well that paragraph anyway - but the article needs a bit of re-ordering to give it some structure.) Mitch Ames (talk) 08:46, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Fences

Resolved

Did they really remove fences?

By the 2000s large amounts of low shrubs, fences had been removed and better lighting introduced.

I was going to change that to "large amounts of low shrubs and fences had been removed" for grammar reasons, but I'm not sure that's what's intended. Mitch Ames (talk) 03:39, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Yes they removed fences and shrubs. satusuro 14:36, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Fixed. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:24, 7 July 2014 (UTC)