Bellows Falls times. [volume] (Bellows Falls, Vt.) 1856-1965, 1859-01-14
From the Green Mountain Freeman.
The State House.

EEOtiSts
In the debate at the recent session of the
I Legislature, and in the discussion in the
newspapers, many and important misstate-
mentsfhaye been made, and imputations in
furious to the honor and good faith Of Mott
| peliershave been fippantly uttered. That
honoris dear to us and to Montpelier and
we shall. undertake to show to the entire
satisfaction of every candid mind that these
imputations are slanderous, and have their
origin sometimes in defective information,
too often in grasping selishness, reckless
of the means it uses,
The history of the extra session of 1857
demonstrates the truth of the following
propositions, viz:
lst. That the offers by other to,ons were
made in the first place for the purpose of
placing themselves on an equality aciM
Montpelier, ia order to haze tie location of
tie capitol decided upon tie merits, and the
4 final offer of Montpelier was for the pur-
pose of putting herself on an equality
with Burlington, the object being the same,
that is, to have the offers equal, and thus
enable the Legislature TO decide the loca-
ton strictly upon its merits and that it is
not true that the location was fixed at
Montpelier because of the offer, except as
here stated.
I'd. That the Legislature, so far as any
expression Of their opinion was made, con
denned the policy of allowing any town to
contribute any large proportion Of the ex-
pense. And that the Legislature expected
that the State would proceed to build the
House acholly out Of their oaca funds, and
rely on the bond for indemnity leaving the
whole matter of the enforcement of the
bond to the viii of future Legislatures.
And the history of that session and of
the two following sessions equally demon
strates that Montpelier has acted with
scrupulous faith, and that it is Burlington
oRty that now has name tarnished by dis
honored .faiM.
To this history of the extra session we
first call the attention of the candid citizens
of Vermont.
The session commenced February 18th
and continued 10 February 9th.
On the 18th, Mr.. Merrill of Montpelier
stated the history of the two State Hous-
es, showing that Montpelier, under the
Facl of 1900, was at the whole expense of
the first house, which was $4,000, and
4 -e-nt. ibutod over $4,000 towards the Sec
ond house none of which has been repaid
Ihereupon Judge Kittredge of Farhaven,
who was ore of the leaders of the oppo.
! sition to Montpelier, and second in ability
TO no one Of them, said that other towns
had propositions to make.
Mr. Stacy Of Burlington, on the same
day, said:
"He was aware that there are embar-
rassments in the way of this question--as
to expense alluded TO by the gentleman
from Montpelier, and as to other offers, al
luded TO by the gentleman from Eairhaven
TO remove these embarrassments, he would
say that Burlington stood ready to furnish
as good grounds, foundation and building as
the present, free of expense to the State.
lie did not do this to bid against Montpelier,
bit to place Burlington on an equality acith
4 Montpelier, and to dtceSt the matter Of dol
lars and cents. 7HiS left the question sim
ply oehether 1t IS desirable to change"
When Mr.. Stacy used the word building
in this offer, he meant only 10 offer as good
grounds, foundation and building as then
existed in Montpelier in the burnt condi-
ton of the old building; the bill he intro
dueed expressly so stated.
Mr.. Marsh of Brandon then inquired
whether Burlington proposed TO offer more
than site. Mr.. Stacy replied that 'what
he proposed was merely to place Burling-
ton and Montpelier on equal terms. He
would say that Burlington would in addition
respond in any amount which the State
should require"
Mr.. Kittredge said:
"Again he invited propositions from other
towns, for although he repudiated the idea
that the State should go begging among
the towns, believing that the State should
build its own house, yet he supposed the
Committee would act in some degree in
reference to the propositions. As the cap
itol is located now, it will be located for
ever.
BIr. Barnes of Rutland said:
"That if it is thought best on the whole
to remove from Montpelier, Rutland offers
to contribute as much as any other town,
if ihe house shall be located there. In
saying this, he did not think that the mere
offers of contribution by towns ought TO de-
eide the question, but that ii should be set
tied fairly, in reference to the convenience,
the interests and the honor of the State"
The whole course of Mr.. Barnes was
high-minded and honorable.
On the Goth of February, Mr. Marsh of
!, Brandon made the offer of $4,000 for
, Brandon.
Mr.. Albee of Westminster. said he ..wouli
not hold ont inducements for towns TO build
: --he would not have the State bribed."
Mr.. Barnes, of Rutland, introduced bill
i 10 locate the capitol at Rutland, conditioned
: that Rutland should furnish the grounds,
and deliver all the marble necessary for a
: marble building.