The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-01-31

Letter Fr1rn Cav segrzw Eexardsss
the work Of the ssrnnIssfoa.


the wsrk Of the cssnmIssiea.
The following letter addressed sy Cor.
Ncsrax 20 the s~assle TsfsrTgpA - self
explanatory:
TO II. Editor OF the Ts'egrcph -IAsar
Sir: In so important matter as ths con-
ssracsiors Of state capitol. involving. a. -
does, the expsn6it1re Of 81 to0,J 90 OF the
rsorey of the state there should De. sase
u, q free. clear and thorough public under
standing Of the acts Of those charges with
tEs responsible duty Of selecting the plans
for the h1ildsng.
misunderstanding or rnisrspresenta sion
o. the matter. saeh as 10 contained IN your
editorial article sodsy upon The Capd:ol
Pans surely should De avoided IN the
interest OF all the people, and / suppose
yo1 viii agree With me the subject - -ncn-
partisan, and not 10 Be criticized merely
Tor partisan reasons
Tine legislature IN its discretion pro
vided ~ lie last sesslon for the creation Of
q capitol bailding commission. to consist
Of the governor. the state auditor and
three members 10 Be appointed by the gov-
ernor.
The discussions Of the bill while pend
ing an the Legislature Itself and IN III CON-
nsttees will disclose that il Was agreed
that not more than three members OF the
same political party should BE members
OF the com mission, ard these discussions
also show that the right Of appointment
Of three members Of the commission was
vested IN the governor because. IS be WAS
appointed the chairman Of the commits
sion and IS the official head OF the state,
upon his head would rest the final ap-
proval or dlsapprovai of the people of the
state at large Of the work done.
After several sessions Of the commits
zion, and after full and free diAcusslon
by It's members. 10 was unanimously
agreed that inasmuch IS plans OF so great
magnitude would necessarily involve an
expert Judgment not possessed BY the
members OF the commission, and impossi-
bic tor them 10 possess without being
themselves EXPERT architects. auaiifica-
ton not prescribed by the legislature Tor
manifest reasons. the services Of an ex-
pert advisory architect should be en-
pioyed To aid the commission IN its de-
cision and final selection.
The advice OF those best qualified TO give
10 vas sought in order TO obtain the best
man. and she services of Prof. William z.
Ware. of Columbia college, we're finally
obtained.
prof Ware has bad an experience of
nesriy half q century in architectural
work Of the fret importance. be has him.
self retired from the active practice OF his
profession, but his services are IN constant
reqgisition as advisor IN the greatest
architectural competitions Of the day.
The great value OF his opinion and the un-
Improbable character of his integrity 10
beyond question, as al honest architects
admit There has never been serious oo-
jeetions 10 his Judgment until be came 20
the state OF Washington. He came TO
Olympia and spent eigat days and most of
the nights. instead of three days as you
say, in studying the plans, and no man
who knows his thorough methods and
cautious judgment can speak slightingiy
OF him as a sort of lightning expert
Prot. Ware made an elaborate report, Sc
lecting SIX plans as those most worthy for
the commissions selection out OF the
number submitted to him
Il am confident thar the people OF the
state OF Washington will decide that the
commission. having felt and declared It's
need OF honest and capable expert advice,
and having taken that advice and paid for
IL, should abide BY the judgement OF its
expert advisor, or show good public cause
for going outside Of that jad gmeat
When you say the governor has made
up his mind 10 have q certain plan. You
grossly misststs the facts My mind IS
made Up on this point: that the plan Sc
iected should be any one OF those recon-
mended by Professor Ware, not certain
plan.
MY position before the commission has
been and Is that " hile | have my prefer
ence. whenever a majority OF the commits
sion decides in favor OF any one OF the
plans reported favorably by Prof. Ware, |
will waive my own choice and most
heartily support the plan selected.
And this brings me TO another ques-
ton raised in your article. You say:
"'If any one should ask how IL came
that not an architect III the state of Wash
ingion was competent to produce a plan
which In the opinion of experts was
worthy Of second thought, we cannot
answer
zone reply Is this: The names of four of
the SIX architects whose plans we're recon-
mended by Prof. Ware are still unknown
to the commission. No one of the four has
been selected by members of the commits
sion. All four may be Washington arch.-
tects so far as the commission knows, as
the envelopes containing their names and
identifying the plan with the architect
have not been opened.
my official duties are such that my time
is fully occupied with other matters, and I
have neither time nor inclination TO enter
into newspaper discussion, bat this matter
is so important that, for nay owa part, /
welcome and invite n fair. free discussion
by the press OF this state Of any OF the acts
OF the commission, and as for the future
II Is my earnest wish, IN Justice TO myself
and the other members Of the commission,
that the press should be represented at al
meetings Of the commission. IN order that
such Observation-Disclosures and misstAte-
meats as are contained IN your article may
be avoided. Very truly yours.
A.~E-r~