The Columbia Democrat. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1837-1850, 1847-02-20
From .hs 'ColsmhA Gpquhsr.
Mn. B. s. GILMoRR:


Democrat Of the 5h instant su srtlCl
which | propose 10 notice, with your
permission, through The cola mns Of the
Enquirer. The Democrat PROCESSES
10 give copy Of a remonslrence sgsn''
a proposed sct 10 authorize the Commis
soners Of this County 10 make certain
oullays. This remonslrsnce is drawn in
profound ignorance Of the subject upon
(which il processes to treat, and ls,in shor,
q paper Of mistaken facts aud misappl.
ed defamation.
# is not proposed 10 repeal any pro.
vision OF The Removal Bill. 1t is mol
proposed 10 put upon the county any
part Of The expense Of erecting lie build
Iings required and contemplated by that
act, But The Commssioners,lhe Grand
Jury and ihe Building Committee havt
simply applied 10 the Legislature 10 au
Ilhorze the outlay Of sum not exceed.
ing S2500 for er ira WOrk and to Jr
Inish The new buildings. Not one dol
lar Of fth5 proposed outlay is TO go fo'
,oork OF materials required by the Re
novQL BIZ, aud therefore The question
discussed in The DanvilIs remonslrsnc,
does not exist, and the quotation of Mr..
Funston's declarations, &c, are not sp,
lplcable TO The matter in hand.
The fire-prooCs ale not required 10 be
bull, BY The provisions Of The Removal
Bill The sc, says that The buildings
shall be of The most approved plan, lot
| i, does no, say Of what kiad they shall
be, except ,hst they shall be Of brick
or stone. ln fact requirement lhs,
the new buildings should be fre,proof
was deliberately end Intentionally kept
out of the bill by The Legislature. When
that bill was upon It's passage in lbtS Sen.
aie, an amendment was offered r. curing
hat the new buildings should be fire,
proof, ,snd after a discussion Of some
'ergih, il Uas potPd dv,On. So the
Senate declared that lhs bill should E0i
r' quire fre.proOf buildings. (SeO Sen
ale Journal, lSA5, pages 2l4 and 2l5.)
LIS highly expedIent, and in lacD
necessary, that GIe proofs should b.
IhuiIi, and economy is Consulted by
Their erection n u, in connection with
The Cont House. II they were buh
hereafter, from The fact that accompany.
ling buildings would be necessary, they
wo uId cost four or FIVE lines as nuct
's by The present arrangement; and TIT
county, 10 The mean time, would suher
inconvenience for want Of them
The remonsrance as printed IN lht
Democrat hInnderingly speaks abou'
'S0fe,' and says that it wou d no
cost $500; and that S25Oo are ssked
Tor it,! There are THREE fre.proois il
the Court iDuse, HE three pairs OF
lonble doors, 10 which alone cost near
5000 s the appropriation is not to pay for
q ''DIe' st al, nor even exclusively tor
The 6rs.Proofs What bvodsring!
Mr., Editor, | cannot avoid adding,
that objections in the prcseol instance,
come with very al grsce from In,
DinvilIe people. who no logger agoI
than 1887 tried 10 gel The county t.xedI
10 puI up 6re-proof buildings al Dan
vile. Over eieUen thousand dollars
are now raised by subscription, and thi.
S2joO appropriation for extra work and
furnishing the buildings is just and ne,
cessary, snd does not cor6 CT in rheI
slightest degree with he Removal SCI.
a CITIZEN.
sEsaSzkzzazaZ
Gambling. --lo the Pennsylvania
Legislatures; few days sine, \ Bill wa.
passed unanimously, for the suppression
If gembrDg. The bill makes gambIIogE
= peoilenrary off'ncp, su,horzes the
hicers Of he law TO brepk open houses
o search for gambling apparatus, upoo
the oath Of any person made for the
purpose before rhe Jusrice Of the Peace
tnd also sub cs The offender TO heavy /
6pea for hr raanhpa of thn Iou,, IT, kiII