The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1871-03-11
THE pURLJC BDTLD5NGs

UPON our third page will be found the ma
jority report of the Committee on Plans of
the Public Buildings Commission, which we
hope will receive the attention from our
readers that it deserves, as a clear, concise,
and unanswerable statement of facts and
figures, and a conclusive reply to the loud
voiced protests and loose accusations of the
anti-Penn Squareites. This report reviews
the whole public buildings controversy, and
shows that from first to last the commission
have acted with perfect good faith to the
public, and that they have earnestly endea-
vored to perform the important duty commit
ted to their charge in such a manner as will
best subserve the public interests. This re-
port reviews the circumstances under
which the vote of last Octo-
Der was taken, and no impartial
person who reads its simple statement of
well-known facts can doubt that the commits
sion is now endeavoring to carry out the
expressed will of the people. The report
truly says that protest from certain pro-
perty-holders upon Market or Broad street
against the plan for placing the public build
ings upon the intersection ought to have no
weight whatever with the commissioners, in
view of the emphatic verdict of property
holders and taxpayers in all sections of the
city which was given last October. There is
one point made in the report that is particu-
larly worthy of consideration in view of the
camor which was first made against the selec-
ton of the Penn Square site, and which is
now being made against the intersection
scheme, with the idea that, ultimately, the
whole project for placing the public buildings
there may possibly be abandoned.
The report saysr-"After various schemes
and attempts for many years to secure the
desired object, which had been defeated from
one cause or another, principally, however,
from the clashing of conflicting interests, not
controlled by desire for the general good of
the public, the Legislature took the matter
in hand and imposed upon the present COM
mission the duty of erecting public buildings
upon whichever one of. the two designated
sites should be fixed by vote of the people"
The clamor against the Penn Square site was
raised entirely by interested parties, and was
entirely irrespective of the public convent
ence, and the same persons are now endeavor-
ing to prevent the plans of the commissioners
from being carried out, because they imagine
that their individual interests will suffer.
The report explains very fully the advan-
tages, both artistic and economical, of one
building over four, and sums up the matter
thus-''The commission was satisfied, after
full and deliberate consideration of the whole
subject, that the necessary accommodations
could be better secured, with a more conve-
nient and economical distribution of space,
by one large building at the intersection than
by four separate buildings upon the several
unequal plots as they stood at the time the
act of the Legislature was passed. The very
object sought to be obtained by concentra-
ton of all the public offices, courts,
and municipal departments would
be practically nullifed by the
erection of four distinct buildings, separated
by streets of over one hundred feet in
width" "One building could be
better, more conveniently and economically
lighted and ventilated than four separate
ones, while the one courtyard in the centre
wonld allow of the court-rooms, for which
quiet is essential, being entirely removed
from the noise of the Streets"
1t is impossible for the anti-Penn Square
party to conceal the real motives which actuate
them in their present efforts to embarrass
the commissioners, and the general public
should bear in mind always that all the agita-
tion is caused by ring of property holders
who, for their individual profit, are deter
mined to leave nothing undone to keep the
location.