Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1889-01-22
you have a suitable lot adjacent to it? You have
the choice; which will You choose?

Mr.. MrLLrKEys PERTINENT QUERY
Mr. Milliken-'I would like to ask the gen.
tleman If he would be in favor of shutting up
the parks of the city,
| Mr.. Randall-"OlI, there is nothing in that
i On the contrary. my opinion and belief is that
a proper post-offce building on Judiciary
/ square would be an oruamentation To the
park"
MIR. Milliken-.'You put enough there and
| there viii be no Judiciary square left"
| Mr. Sowden said that he had formerly
favored the Judiciary square site. but had ac-
| guessed IN the report of the committee.
Every member of the House." he said. "must
| recognize the public importance of the erec-
| ton OF a city post-office building in this city,
| The present building is not only inadequate
| for the needs of the service, but
A STANDING DISGRACE TO THE CAPITAL OF THE
1 NATION"
| He read the clause in the Presidents last
message urging the necessity Of a city post
| Office building in Washington, and said that no
better opportunity than this could occur for
the carrying out of this recommendation.
| From purely economical standpoint" he
continued, Il believe in selecting land owned
| by the government for the erection of the
necessary public buildings, provided the loca-
| ton Is accessible and suitable for the conve-
nience of the people and a proper transaction
| OF the public business. l shall vote for the
present proposition. however. because firmly
| believe that the matter can be satisfactorily
| adjusted in a committee of conference and
fear it is the only way in which bill can be
passed in the closing hours of this session."
| MIR. Randall-Woud not the gentleman be in
favor of remodeling the late court house build
ing, so that we could have a court house. post
| office and other municipal Offices here for the
city of Washington
Mr.. Sowden-That is one of the reasons whv
1 was in favor of the selection of Judiciary
square. but was outvoted by the committee
Mr.. Spinola-The question narrows down to
| a clear business issue, and doubt whether
| there is member on the floor of this House.
| acting in a tiduciary capacity. who would Gre
ate an outlay of 600 when he could accom-
| plish the same purpose void of that expense.
| Now. l am not opposed to the erection of a
suitable building for post-offce for this city.
and will vote for it at the proper time; but
am opposed to the expenditure of $500 for
site when we have one right in the immedi-
ate vicinity OF the lot proposed to be purchased
| that we can use without the expenditure of a
| single dollar. Now, there is a strong power,
as indicated by the gentleman from Pennsyl-
yania Mr.. Randalll, behind all of these WASH
ington measures. 1t is very powerful infiu-
| ence. whether electrical or otherwise | do not
| know; but 1t acts upon and reaches us in
| such way that bills are reported favorably
| and advocated on the floor of this House with
| out regard to common sense and justice.
| would like to vote for a post-offce. as l have
| said. but will not vote for S450000 to be paid
1 u
that proposed to be purchased for nothing.
For that reason hope the proposition will not
| prevail.
Mr.. Dibble-What seems to be the mistake
made by gentlemen who have been speaking in
| favor OF Judiciary square is this: That it is
not simply for this House to say where the site
| Is to be. 1t requires the concurrent action of
the Senate and the House. Now, Mr.. Speaker
have had some little experience in relation to
this question. 1t has been my sphere of duty
in this House to have been for six years past
| on the committee on public buildings and
| grounds and have myself held the position
which has been advocated here to-day L have
| been IN favor of putting the post-offce build
| ing upon Judiciary square, but realize two
things: first. that that proposition has not met
with general support on this floor, and, second,
that the sentiment of the Senate (and have
been in contact with that sentiment for the last
SIX years. Is entirely opposed to that PROPOSE
ton Now, think 1t Is a good rule of legisla-
| ton that if you cannot get the best or what
you think is the best, then YOU should take the
next best that you can get This proposition,
which has been brought in here from the COM
| mlstee on public buildings and grounds. was
arrived at by mutual concessions among men,
bers OF the committee, and, considering the
size OF the square, 1t is at least as cheap in
every particular as any proposition that has
been submitted to the committee.
SITE LARGE ENOUGH FOR THE Posr-oFFICE
AND THE DISTRICT OFFICES.
The square is a large one and it will furnish
site not only for the post-office, but also for
the District offices and for great many pur-
poses of general departmental business which
are now carried on In rented premises 1t is
well situated, on elevated ground; it is near
the two depots where the mails come and go:
1t Is good site; and am not one who, because
l may agree in the abstract with the gentleman
| from Pennsylvania Mr.. Randall or with the
gentleman from New York Mr.. Spinolal or
with the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Kilgorel.
will therefore say that the city of Washington.
the capital of the nation. shall remain without
| post-ofice building because may think some
other proposition would be better than the one
that is presented. For these reasons so far as
L am concerned, have yielded my views, as
other members of the committee have yielded
theirs and we have brought in this bill as one
step toward that consummation which we air
desire. This site may not be agreed upon by
the Senate; they may substitute another site
and then the matter will go into con-
ference, and probably something will be agreed
upon. At any rate. the necessity for this leeis-
lation is so urgent that think the House ought
to sacrifice something for the sake of getting a
place for the city post-office. and this plan is
quite as economical as any that has been sug-
gested, If we once decide to go out of the pub
lie grounds for site for this building. The
Senate proposition proposes a site which can
not be bought for less than million and a
quarter or million and half of dollars That
Is Ine proposition OF the Senate that has been
sent US. Is not this better than that? II we
are to go out of public grounds at all for site,
this is the most economical proposition that
has been presented. There are 10000 square
| feet of ground IN the square; it is one OF the
largest squares in the city, at least double the
size of the majority of those that have been
offered. and hope that the House will pass
this bill. so that it may go to the Senate and
become the basis of something definite
Mr.. Randall merely desire to say that the
first step which the gentleman from South Car
DINA MIR. Dibble) says he desires to take is a
step IN contest between two private blocks or
squares. and when we once take that step fear
we shut out entirely the proposition to put the
building upon Judiciary square.
Mr.. Blount-Does tue gentleman mean that
the conferees would not have Jurisdiction to
select site outside of the two contending
sites?
Mr.. Randall-The Senate has declared for a
site costing about a million and quarter of
dollars, and the House is asked to declare for
a site which will cost about S4300OO For one.
am opposed to both, because l believe that
you should take Judiciary square, which is q
suitable and convenient site, without paying a
dollar for it.
The question was taken, and it was decided
in the negative (two-thirds not voting in favor
thereof)-yeas 109; nays, 1903; not voting, los.
An Amateur Fireman.
PRESIDENT ELIOT, OF HARVARD COLLEGE, DIS
TINGUIsHEs HIMSELF.
A ROston aDecial To ha philadalrb;a T,x,,no