Western Kansas world., 1886-02-27

expenditure to be made upon the eas
wing to the $75, 1000 named in the act
And we further find that the board o
state house commissioners, in violation
J of their duty, and in violation of wha
they knew to be the intention OF tn
legislature and the law, being ably aidet
and abetted therein by the architect
who is equally culpable, have already
expended, including liabilities incurred
but not paid, more than $4,000 in ex
cess of the amount appropriated, and
that from SIS, 900 to $25, 900 more viii
be required to complete the work. The
excuses made for this, are that it was
necessary to put in additional iron
trusses to support the ceiling, at cost
of SIC, 800, and new boilers for the heat
apparatus, at a cost S2,1S4,
which were not known to be necessary
at the time the estimate was made; and
that they, the architects as well as the
board, supposed that the senate wanted
better room than the house; and that
if the senate chamber was finished in
the same style as the west wing, it would
not be in keeping. with the growth and
progress of the state.
We do not think the excuses sufficient.
This increased expenditure caused by
these items amounts to but $12, 800.
General Anderson testifies that the sum
of $3,675 was put into the estimate for
renewing the steam heating apparatus,
which reduces the amount of expense
not in the estimate to less than $4,000,
and the expenditure of $400 Of that sum
was caused by Tot letting the iron truss
contract to the lowest bidder; and as to
the style and expense Of the finish
which should have been adopted, the
board of commissioners and the archi-
tects had no right to gainsav the wishes
and commands of the Legislature.
The board of state house commission
ers met once a month-and in one or
two cases oftener-went through a
routine of business, allowed the bills that
were recommended by the archi-
tects, and went home-rarely staying
more than one day, and frequently less
for which they were paid by law $50
per month-in reality about $50 per
day. Instead of giving the work such
personal supervision as the best interest
of the state required, and as the law
makes it their duty to do, they gave it
no personal supervision, allowed it to
take care of itself, turned it over entirely
to the architects; allowed them to run it
without let or hindrance; on their recon-
mendation allowed illegal claims amount
ing to hundreds of dollars, and seemed
in all things to forget, or neglect, the
duties and responsibilities which the law
devolved upon them as sworn officers Of
the state
The contract for the iron trusses was
not let to the lowest bidder; the person
to whom this contract was let was in To
peka, in consultation with the board and
architect, at their instance, prior to the
letting; he had purchased material and
commenced work on these trusses prior
to the letting, and the contract was
awarded to him upon bid $400 higher
than the lowest bid from an equally
responsible bidder, and while we do not
find from this that there was that cor
ruption and dishonesty which the
facts would seem to indicate,
We do find seeming f"vorit
ism, which, to say the least, is suspic-
ious, and which operated to the detri-
ment of the state. 1t is but fair to the
board to say that their explanation of
this matter is, that the person to whom
this contract was awarded agreed to fin
ish the work fifteen days sooner than
any other bidder; but, in fact, he was
more than fifteen days behind the time
fixed by his contract; and yet no deduc-
ton was made on account thereof
The board allowed work to be done
and material to be furnished amounting
to thousands of dollars, without any
written contract, the person doing the
same presenting his pay rolls and bills,
on which he was allowed by the board
pay for his own services, and for all ey
penses as reported by him, and in addi-
lien thereto, 10 per cent, as perquisite.
The excuse of the board for this is that
this person could buy material cheaper
than it could be bought by the state,
and that the work was of such character
that it could not well be let by contract.
The salaries that the state was paying
for supervisory services and superin-
tending the work would seem to indicate
that this work might have been done
under the direction of some of the sal
aried employees, at saving to the state
of several hundred dollars.
As fol the architects, in the matters of
exceeding the appropriation, letting of
contracts to other than the lowest bidder,
payment of illegal claims, we find them
to be equally worthy with the
board, as in all these matters they ad-
vised the action that was taken, and were
able advocates of the adoptions of the
plans that they well knew would require
an expenditure far beyond the amount
appropriated.
The senate chamber is in many res
poets well planned, beautiful and artistic
in design, in material and in workman
ship, and in other respects the plan is
bad, the material faulty, and the work
manship poor. We cannot but condemn
the low, heavy archways that form the
main entrance to the chamber and ad-
jacent cloak rooms, etc. They remind
us more of vaulted basement, or crypt,
than the principal entrance to a lofty
chamber; and much more will this be
apparent when the main corridor and