HET PALEIS^ RAADHUIS
8
HEEMSCHUT
Bij de vele meeningen omtrent het PaleisRaadhuis-vraagstuk tot uiting gebracht, is het
belangwekkend het oordeel te vernemen van een Amerikaansch-Hollander. The Netherland-
American Foundation zendt ons als ruilnummer maandelijks een kort geschrift, gewijd aan
wat, uit New-York gezien, in Holland gebeurt, dus wat de Hollanders daar zien als 't
belangrijkste, 't Laatste nummer is geheel gewijd aan 't oude Amsterdamsche stadhuis. De
verhandeling, geschreven door den heer A. J. BARNOUW sluit met:
As a native of Amsterdam I feel grieved and disappointed by this action of the Burgomaster
and Aldermen. Was the committee of experts appointed to establish the city's ownership
and, on the strength of that, the city's right to make its old Stadhuis an object of barter
with the State? The citizens never suspected that this would be the inference to be drawn
from the Committee's flndings, when they hailed the report of the experts as a signal victory
for Amsterdam. To them it was not a matter of fifteen millions that was at stake, the city's
honor was involved. If Amsterdam should need a new City Hall, it would be able to build
one without State support. But that is not what Amsterdam needs. It wants its old City
Hall back, because in it the people see the palladium of their city's dignity and greatness.
The municipal government, until the days of national disgrace under NAPOLEON's rule, had
always resided on the Dam, the public square that was the hub round which the civic life
revolved. When the' present palace was built in the middle of the seventeenth century, it
was erected on the very same spot on which the old Stadhuis had stood. That spot has
been hallowed by traditionno other place in the city can vie with it in wealth of historical
associations. And the people of Amsterdam want their government to return to that spot.
They want the dead palace revitalized' into the busy Stadhuis for which it was intended.
The place which the Burgomaster and Aldermen have chosen for the new City Hall that
the State's fifteen million guilders would help Amsterdam to'build. is in a part of the town
that was developed in the nineteenth century. No memories that could awaken civic pride
attach to the spot. And should Amsterdam's government move thither in order to enable its
rightful residence to continue a mummified existence on the Dam? There are, fortunately,
two Aldermen who have signed a minority report in which they dissent from their colleagues.
They have voiced the feelings to which this letter tries to give expression. Let us hope that
their point of view may prevail with the majority of the Council, and that the City, instead
of the barter proposed, may decide to build a new royal palace worthy of the visitor whom
Amsterdam loves to welcome every April, and to retain possession of its old Stadhuis, in
order that the city government may again reside in its traditional home, which it should
never have abandoned.
Wij voegen er nog bij de aardige opmerking, eenigen tijd geleden naar voren gebracht
door den heer Mr. N. BEETS in een artikel in 't „Handelsblad", hierop neerkomende, dat
men dankbaar mag zijn, dat gedurend'e de geheele 19e eeuw het bouwwerk Paleis is
gebleven. Het heeft al dien tijd geslapen; er is niets aan gewijzigd. Ware het gebouw
gedurende de geheele 19e eeuw Raadhuis gebleven, dan zou het nu ongetwijfeld tengevolge
van velerlei verbouwingen hopeloos verprutst zijn.
A. K.
