The Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1877-1885, 1882-10-31
STATE HOUSE APPROPRIATION.

At the November election the people
will be asked to vote upon two propesi
tiens, submitted separately, in addition to
the county, district and state tickets, viz:
For or against the appro priation of 1881,
913.1S Cor the completion of the State
House, and, for or against the cession of
the Illinois and Michigan canal to the gen
eral government. On the first of these
propositions a'vote was taken few years
ago, and the proposition was defeated by
an overwhelming majority The people
considered the asking of this money by
the people of Springfield under the circum-
stances under which the building was
located, as piece of audacious impudence.
The law under which that vote was taken
seems to be of an India-rlibber character.
permitting the governor to cause the prop
osstion TO be submitted to a vote al any
general election without limit The law
was thus originally framed, no doubt, for
the purpose of wearing the patience of the
people into finally consenting to this mon
strous steal
We have no reason TO believe that there
has been change in the views of voters
on this question since it was lastsubmitted
We at least hope there has been none, and
that the proposition win be again defeated
and continue to be defeated whenever sub
nitted until after Springfield shall have
complied with her most sacred obligations
made to secure the location of the state
house ON its present site.
The following extract from the Chicago
Times will give additional information on
the subject: 2. e
The state constitution of 1870 made pro-
vision for the expenditure of not more than
So, 100000 for the erection of q state house.
The sum was exhausted long ago, and the
Al
another pull could be made on the treas
ury. as the peeples 10 was thought. would
never ALLOW such acostly house to stand
unfinished Probably they would not
even though there might have been bad
management and extravaganza in the
former expenditures. But the bad faith of
Springfield in the matter so displeased the
people, that in 1878 when they were asked
to vote enough to finish the building, they
refused to do so. by a very positive vote.
The circumstances have not changed any
since. Springfield has not offered to
keep faith with the stale, and though the |
people of that city consider d. an seyesore
to have to look upon an unfinihed front |
theyswill hayegte look apon it a while LON |
ger, and oontinale to do so.we hope till they
fulfil their part of the contract, which |
stood as follows: When it was proposed to |
put up a new state house, u movement was |
started to change the state capitol to some /
other more available city Peoria was a /
and offered a beautiful site on
The bluff free, if the capitol should be re-
moved to that city. Springfield, not to be
ohtbid by Peoria, Decatur. or Carlinville.
III of which pat in a bid for the prize, put
ID a bid also. The state already owned |
eight acres, for which it paid $50. 900, quite
arge enough for the state house, BUT GER
ain citizens of Springfield executed bond
% deliver free to the state four acres more i
ying south of the aforesaid eight acres
This bond was duly filed with the seere-
AIRY of state with sureties to- the amount
If $500, 900. 1t is not necessary to detail
Ill the twistings of Springfield croekedness|
q this matter The necessary ground was
q be condemned, and its value charged to
he bondsmen, but neither national or state
'bligors of this kind are ever compelled to
Ieep faith as they ought. So no transfer
las ever been made. This breach of faith
ooks all the worse when we look at the |
'psition of the state house on the eight
Iere lot.
! .s 4