X 



Mdiisioii Foini(l(ition 

 [Sfrucfiirc B] 



DLSCRIPTION OF EXCAVATIONS 



Willi tlic exception of Wall A, the protruding bit ol 

 brickwork near the clump of trees (where Highway 

 621 makes its turn to the southeast) was the only 

 evidence reniainine; above ground in 1956 of Nfarl- 

 borough's past grandeur. Designated Structure B, it 

 was plainly the remains of a cellar foundation, w hich 

 the tangled thicket of vines and trees adjacent to it 

 tended to confirm. Since its location corresponded 

 with the initially estimated position of the courthouse, 

 it seemed possible that the foundation might have 

 sunivcd from that structure. 



Excavation of Structure B began accidentally when 

 the excavators began following the westward course 

 of Wall A-I, as described in the preceding section on 

 the -Wall System." Wall .\-I abutted, but did not 

 mesh with, the corner of two foundation walls, one of 

 which ran northward and the other continued on for 

 28 feet in the same direction as Wall .\ I. The brick- 

 work in the 2H-foot stretch of Wall .\ I was laid in a 

 step-back, butlr<'.s.s-type construction. .At the bottom 

 course the wall was 2.65 feet thick, diminishing 

 upward for fise successive courses to a mi ■ 'f 



1.5 feet. A wall runninu northward thee,. .- 



tion wall — was exposed for 16 feet front the pomtof 

 its junction with Wall .\-I until it disappeared under 

 the highway. It was found to have the s-imc butircvs- 

 ts pe construction. There was no evidence of a cellar 

 within the area enclosed by the foundation walls Miuth 

 of the highway. 



Excavation of the east foundation wall was resumed 



MoiiM ot tn<- Highway, but here no bu 

 found, with evidence of a cellar \i- 

 This evidence consisted of a curious complex of 

 features, comprising remnants of two parallel eios- 

 walls only 4.5 feet apart with a brick paveim nt 

 between 4.8 feet l>elow the surface. The cast wall 

 and the cro.ss walls had flush surfaces. The northerK- 

 cross wall was tied into the brickwork of the east wall, 

 showing that it was built integrally with the founda- 

 tion. The northerly cross wall had l>een knocked 

 down, however, to within five courses on the floor 

 level. The pavement was fitted against it. 



The southerly cross wall was not tied into the brick- 

 work of the east wall, and the pavenient had hccw 

 torn up next to it. Thus it was evident that this wall 

 had l)een erected subsequent to the building of the 

 foundation, that it had shortened the cellar In- 4.5 

 feet, and that the cell.ir extended southward to a 



pt)int Ijeneath the highway where it was ii '■'-• 



to excavate. Documentar\' evidence to coi 

 alteration will Ik- shown l)elow (p. 91). 



Extending 12.5 feet north of the original cro« w.ill 

 was another eellarless section, with step-lwck but- 

 Irt'^ 'uring the fouiKl.ition wall, .\nolhrr 



pa\i > m evidence north of tfv' ••>• !•■ • 



for 26 fert. with a final 14.25-foot cell 

 as f.ir as the north wall of the struc 



of the cellar, to the extent that i; 



shrubs made il poniblr to drterniine. ^^ 

 brickbats at- 



removed. \.\ 



walls and of floor irralmr 



85 



