Washington sentinel., 1854-04-09
MILITARY sUPERINTENDENC OF
CIVIL WORKS.


CIVIL WORKS.
Yesterday we continued our remarks on this
subject, and we took occasion to criticise some
statements put forth by the Washington Chson.
But we did not exhaust the material at our
disposal for we know well enough that reforms
can be effected only by frmness and perseyer-
ance. Therefore, we make the following COM
mentary on portion ofthe Washington Unioa's
remarks, which we have not noticed heretofore,
and which we say, in this regard, is based on
information which we believe to be perfectly re-
liable and trustworthy.
The Union says, and we think that its state
ment is not only devoid of frankness, but is a
failure as a specimen of ingenious evasion:
"In reference to the Capitol extension, Mr..
Stanton says that he believes it will be "com-
pletely ruinedn by the alterations which have
been made in the plans. He says that "the al
teration Of the plan made necessary new toun-
dations; and these have necessarily cut up and
destroyed, for all useful purposes, all the rooms
in the basement, which might otherwise have
been finished and used for committees, as those
inthe basement of this House are used.'
"Upon inquiry we have ascertained that Mr.
Stanton has been misnformed in reference to
this matter. We learn that there are as many
committee-rooms in the modified plan as there
were in the original design, and that it is the
opinion Of the engineer in charge of the work,
and also of the architect of the building, that
they will be more conveniently arranged"
The question is not whether there will be as
many rooms in the modified PLAN as in the
original, but whether the alterations have not
entirely destroyed the rooms in the basement
story. This, We understand to be Mr.. Stanton's
assertion, and the engineer in charge will
hardly say that it is not true, if our informa
ton be correct. In the old Capitol some of the
best committee-rooms are in the basement in
the new wings the Easements will have none, if
we understand the matter rightly. All the
roomsin the basement may be destroyed, as any
one may see, and yet, as the engineer says, there
will be as many rooms in the modified as in the
originalplan. But, who does not see, at the same
time, that the opinion of the engineeE, thatthere
will be as many rooms in the modified as in the
original plan, may be true in erespect and yet
thorough deceptionin another. We understand
that not only are the rooms in the basement
totally destroyed for useful purposes by the
alterations in the plans of the building; but
many of the rooms in the first story are so cut
up and darkened as to be wholly unfit for COM
mttees. The rooms left by the modified plan,
though they may be as numerous as those in
the original plan, certainly do not occupy as
large a space or have the same capacity.
While, therefore, the engineer, in his opinion,
may be in one sense right, in another he is
grossly wrong according to our Judgment. As
to his belief that they are more conveniently
arranged, it could hardly be expected that he
would say less.
II does not appear, from any authority we
have seen, that the late appropriations in Eng.
land for the establishment Of national armo-
ries, contemplates military superintendence;
and even if it did, it is no argument in favor cf
its continuance here. When such system
finds favor with the British aristocracy, it is
time the republican freemen of the United
States should abandon it. The Parliament
houses of England we're built BY an eminent
civilian, who, instead of being supplanted by
military cadet in his high duties, was knighted
for the distinguished genius he displayed in the
design and execution of his great work. The
glory which belongs to Sir Charles Barry, for
his successful completion Of that magnificent
structure on the west bank of the Thames, can
never be transferred from him to add lustre to
the name of some favorite member of the gov
ernment engineer corps.