Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1858-12-31


~ Tho following, although appearing as
editorial in the F-scmaq of this week, was
prepared by gentleman of this place who
is thoroughly conyersant with the history Of
the question under discussion, and La. been
banded to us by him with the request that we
publish. We chceriully give place to it,
though by SO doing we are compelled to leave
out much that had been previously prepared
for this weeks paper
THE STATE HOUSE.
In the debate at the recent session of the
Legislature, and in the discussion in the news
papers, many and important miscellaneous
have been made, and imputations injurious to
the honor and good faith of Montpelier have
been fippantly uttered That honor is dear
to us and to Montpelier and we shall under
take TO show to the entire satisfaction of ev-
cry candid mind that these imputatious are
slaudorous, and have their origin sometimes
in defective information, too often in a grasp
ing sclfshucss. reckless of the means it uses.
The history of the extra session of 1857
demonstrates the truth of the following prop
ositions, viz:
LIST That tine offers by other io,cas were
made in the first place for the purpose of plac-
ing Themselves oa oH e9n1Ny rH Noutpeier
10 order To hare me i9cai'oa of the capital de-
cidcd upon the Dlerits and the final offer of
Montpelier was for the purpose of putting
herself on an equality with Burlington, the
object being the same, that is, to have the Of
fers equal, and thus enable the Legislature to
decide the location strictly upon its merits ;
and that it is not true that the location was
fixed at Montpelier Lecouse of the offer, ex-
cept as here stated.
ID. That the Legislature so far as any OK
preston of their opinion was made, condemp-
ed the policy of allowing any town to contrib
ute any large proportion OF the expense. And
that the Legislature expected that the State
would proceed to build the House wiolly oia
Of their o,cu ttods, and rely on the bond for
indemnity; leaving the whole matter Of the
enforcement of the bond to the will of future
Legislatures.
And the history Of that session and Of the
two following sessions equally demonstrate,
that Montpelier has acted with scrupulou,
faith. and that it is burlington oul,, that now
has name furnished by dishoporcd fajH.
To this history Of the extra session we first
call the attention of the candid citizens o.
Vermont
The session commenced February 18th and
continued to February 27th.
On the 18TH. Mr. Merrill of Montpelier
stated the history of the two State Houses
showing that Montpelier. under the act o
1905, was at the whole expense of the frs
house which was $4,000. and contributed
over 81 900 towards the second house none
of which had been repaid Ihcreupou Judge
Kittrcdge of Fairbayen, who was one of the
leaders of the opposition to Montpelier, and
second in ability to no one of them, said thai
other towns had propositions to make.
MIR. Stacy Of Burlington, ON the same day
said
lie was aware that there are embarrassment. in th
wa! Of ths 4uesnl2n--as 20 expense alluded 10 10y ih
E9n5n.h rom Monlptl'r ana rs oiHtr onrr,' a.na
Ca 70 10y tne senutm'h IRON N'h,Ne"' oftuo'e ines
roa, 10 f,rnisb ne yoo5 gyon3. f,upG,ion apd i
ing the present, free Of expense the state. Hcd
Eot 40 ta' 10 nd a3a"t H1'ntfe '1t 10 PIX e
a,ater Of doaq5s and ernu Tl@ eji me question sia
ply 'chefher u Is d.sirabe to cbuge
" men MI 9tacy uSeu the wora '""a'"g u
TINS oher' ne meant only to ofer as goo'
grounds foundation ana building as me" eN