The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1890-11-16
WHERE SHALL IT GO?
Tax-Payers and Prominent Peo-
I Z s s pie Interviewed. l01'sa i
CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING.
Most Of the Citizens Say Unite the Two-Mr
Riter's Vigorous Views.

WoIhlnSHlaH uOeSn' matter TO anyone but
the politicians. All the people want and
all they demand is that the project shall
go on.
A HERALD reporter yesterday took
some expressions of opinion on the ques
ton, ''Shall the city and county build
jointly or separately" Here are the
results:
The first man hunted up was County Sc
lectman Howe:
''Selectman,n said the reporter ''you
have been represented as being in favor of
the county's drawing out OF the joint build
ing compact and building by itself. It that
true."
mo, SIR" was the emphatic rejoinder.
II am in favor of the JOINT building first,
last and all the time. l am now ON my
way to see Judge Barch, who, as far as L
know, is the only member of the county
court at all DESTROYS of seeing the county
build by itself. l intend to push the matter
to an issue as far as / can. Sebastian Mil
Ter reels the same way, know, and l don't
think MIR. Cahoon has any decided views
against it. l was convinced the city never
intended to letApponyi putup the building,
and voted to settle with him in order that
some architect might be gotten to go ahead
with the work. Two Salt Lake architects,
L understand, giving their names), have
slgnlfied their willingness to take Appoints
contract and supervise the construction of
the building for u per cent"
Mr.. W. W. Ritter hit the nail emphatically
on the head when he saio: Not only in
my opinion should the two buildings be
erected together, but the city and county
of Salt Lake should be one institution. The
same government should run both-that is,
Salt Lake city should be Salt Lake county.
A. L
taxpayers by joint administration.
Tbos. w. Jennings spoken the same vein
and said there was no reason why one asses
sor and collector shouldn't do the work for
both city and county and $1,000 to $1,000
year saved the taxpayers.
M. &. Cummings wanted the combine
and wanted the building just where the
excavation is-noWhere else.
G. S. Burton says keep the two together
They will suffice for years, and when they
get so big that they want TO divide, let the
city buy the county out. Being just across
the way from the present site, he is natu-
rally readyt to take up shotguns at any init
nation of a removal.
Mr.. j. r. Walker favored the idea of
separation of the two buildings: he thought
each county and city needed one-the
county could build its now. and the city
when it got able-not before He rather
thought it would be good idea to have
one building on the east and one on the
west side. a strong reason for the sep
arate building idea was that in case of fire,
records and books Of immense value be-
longing to both county and city might he
lost. If the buildings were separate and
fire occurred, the liability to loss would be
lessened
James Sharp SAID he had always favored
the idea Of the two buildings being united
Jas. t. Little was Of the opinion that
joint building would be both preferable
and mora economical.
Councilman Cohn-I think the compact
as originally entered into by the city and
county should be adhered to, as in my
opinion it would be equally advantageous
to the city, the county and the citizens. If
this is done l shall use ali my efforts to
have the building erected on the original
site with as lutte delay as possible.
Recorder Hyams-I haven't given the
matter sufficient consideration to express
an opinion.
Assistant Recorder Shannon-From the
present appearance OF things it seems to
ME that it would be better for the City and
county to dissolve partnership in the pro-
iect and let each go il alone.
Treasurer Walden think JOINT build
ing would be a great economy. The city
and county can build jointly at much less
expense than by putting up two buildings
Ii the arrangement is adhered to have
perfect faith that the building will be
erected on the original site without any
further unnecessary OF unreasonable delay
] think the correspondence which has been
published in the papers shows that the city
and county officials were warranted in
going ahead as slowly and cautiously as
they have.
Auditor Hoge-I would rather see two
good buildings than one. II would be bet
ter to have one building on each side of the
city than to consolidate them both on one
side.
w. S. Mccormick think the plan as
originally agreed upon should be carried
out. The officials are to'be praised rather
than blamed for proceeding cautiously.
The plans of Apponyi are not at all prac-
ticable, and the delay has doubtless saved
complications which would have arisen had
those plans been carried out. 1t will be
much better to have one central building
which will be credit to the city than to
have two insignificant buildings ! have
no doubt but that the plan will be carried
out successfully and TO The satisfaction of
all parties. This talk about the site being
changed is all nonsense. There never was
anything in 1t.
Mayor Scott-The city and county build
ing will be erected just as soon as matters
can be arranged, and it will be erected en-
the site originally selected. There has
been good deal of delay, but it was all
necessary and IL the interests of the citi-
zens. If these plans can be changed to
meet all requirements, l should like to see
them used. If that isn't practicable, we
will have to get new plans.
Selectman Howe am just as strongly
in favor OF the joint building as | was in
the first place. | think such a building
would be preferable on the grounds OF
economy, appearances and convenience.
Furthermore the joint building will be
erected.
VIM. Glasmann-I don't like the consoli
dation idea. 1t seems TO me that it would
be more satisfactory for The city and
county to have seperate buildings and it
would certainly be better for the city to
haye building on each side.
l.. +. kullak-l am not convert to the
joint building idea. 1t seems TO me that it
would be better for The city and county to
work independently, and then the work
would be completed some time, besides
this it would help the city great deal
more to have one building on each side
than to consolidate them both on the east
side.
f. M. Bishop, of the Midland Investment
company-It would be better to have one
fine building than two independent ones
We should have building better than any
city west of Chicago.
II. G. Lett have not given the subject
a great deal of attention, but it appears to
me that it would be much more convenient
to have the joint building, while on the
other hand l have heard no strong argu-
ment against the plan.
D. Van buskirk-I favor the joint build
ing or the grounds Of economy and con-
venience. / think the public buildings of
the city and county should be together, so
that man having business to transact
with both will Lot have to run all over
town to do it.