Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1857-02-20
gIlatrbman & State Juurnal.
MONTPELIER. FEBRUARY 30, 1857.
THE srATE HOUSE QUESTION.

whole state. his ideas arc CnOtlcu TO fcSptCt-
full considoration,--Ed Watohman.
THE R1our ANp rHE WRONG OF THE rnrNo.
In order to decide whether the State House
ought to be removed from Montpelier, 1t Will
be necessary for the members OF the Legisla-
ture to look very closely into their duties as
legislators and members of the body polite
for they have not only the various localities
from which they come to represent, but they
are legally and morally bound to act in ac-
oordance with the separate and collective in
tercsts of the State, as well as to preserve the
moral standing Of the law making power.
1t is stated that good and competent en-
ginecrs and architects have been employed to
examine the walls Of the old capitol and that
they are sound. except in few instances
where the wood work came in contact with
the door-ways and windows, and that an es-
timated outlay of forty thousand dollars will
rebuild the capitol in as complete style as
before the fire.
Taking this statement to be correct. we
viii spend a few moments in the enquiry
whether in moral and pocuniary point Of
view, it is not wrong to remove the State
House to a now locality.
II will cost but forty thousand dollars 20
rebuild the State House at Montpelier; but
if it is removed elsewhere, it cannot be orec-
ted for less than its original cost. and if it
can be built for less whatever it will cost
more than forty thousand dollars, will be but
a simple waste of money for the sole purpose
of gratifying some one locality in the State, /
at the expense of every othor part of the |
community
Then, no matter whether some other local |
ity will rebuild the capitol without charge |
to the State treasury all cost that exceeds the |
cost of rebuilding at Montpelier, is actually |
complete a waste Of money though that
money was burned, so far the state of Yer
mont is concerned, or the individuals who .
pay it out; and if individuals in the State /
pay the money, and it is waste for them,
then, also, is it waste for the State in which /
they live.
Now if it is true that the capitol can be re-
built at Montpelier for forty thousand dollars,
then is it also true that whatever outlay is
made by the Legislature, either TO be paid out
of the treasury, or by individuals in the
State. over and above that sum. is a needless
waste of money and therefore wrong.
Every member of the Legislature before he
votes to remove the capitol, and consequently
to impose this additional tax upon the whole
State, or some part Of it, ought to be fully
satisfied that he is doing the greatest good to
the greatest number in the entire State. and
that he benefits the locality to which it is re-
moved more than he INJURIES tho town from
which he removes it, and also causes the
whole State to be better accommodated than
il now is. or else he does an injury without
n corresponding good, while he, at the same
time, creates an enormous expense, with the =
of improving only one town and :
vicinity, while he INJURIES another town and y
vicinity more than he benefits the one to =
which the capitol is removed giving no bet T.
ter accommodation to the entire State than v
before. g
Should it so happen that any locality in the -
State should undertake to influence the vote :,
Of any one member by offering one hundred :,
thousand dollars to the State of Vermont in V
that that member would vote to !.
remove the State House TO that locality - =
would not such an offer, when morally con- .
sidered. have tendency to corrupt the integ- :
rity Of our Legislative counsels, and be the :
inciplent step of wicked men TO sap the very =
of our free government .
Now the member who suffers himself to
be influenced by such a proposition, must !,
know that the walls of the old State House d,
at Montpelier, mainly sound and nearly ready
for the woodwork and finish. together with
the grounds around the building, the gas fix
lures, and all other outward arrangements.
which are estimated to cost some one hundred
thousand dollars. He also knows that Mont
pelier is at last equally as well located to ac-
commodate the various parts Of the State as
any locality, to which he may be required to
vote to remove it. With this knowledge. can
he suffer himself to vote to remove the State
House, and thus throw away the one hundred
thousand dollars because it is offered to the
State of Vermont in consideration of his
yotes
If vote can be bought for a consideration,
is it essential that the money must pass to
the voter in order to corrupt the individual;
and can the individual members of the Iegis-
lature purge themselves of moral corruption
If the offer is made to them as a Legislative
body, any more than they could If made to
them individuality
The intention of the party, who means to
secure the vote, is to induce the individual
members to vote differently than they would
if they were left free. without the hope of
gain to themselves, or to some other party,
whom they suppose will be benefited by the
change Of the individual vote, OF the vote of
the Legislature as a body.
The process of reasoning. through which
a member must suffer himself to pass. in this
case, cannot be essentially different from that
which win convince him when his own pri-
waite interests are considered In the one
case he is influenced to vote, because another
party reaps the benefit; in the other, because
he himself is to be the recipient of the bonus
paid.
Can the immoral tendency of suffering ones
self to be thus influenced be denied by any
one who wishes to preserve, intact, the strict
moral integrity of our Legislative bodess
Thore is one other view which ought TO
have its weight in the mind of every honest
voter. Is it not an act of bad faith to the
citizens Of Montpelier and vicinity, to permit
an accident to interfere with their whole in
terests, and take from the actual value of their
entire real estate, at least, twenty per cent.
when there is TO be no corresponding gain to
the State of Vermont, as a whole, but an ac-
tual waste of one hundred thousand dollars
TO either the treasury Of the State, OF to in
dividuals resident thereini
Suppose you build the now State House at
burlington, and in few years Rutland be-
comes more opulent, and feels little envious
OF Burlington, because it is the Capital of the
State; another accident can burn the State
House, and again we have the same question
to decide, and then, the capitol being first