The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-06-20
B2UTAL COURsEOF A MINNEAPOLIS
PAPER IN ATTACKING PUB-
LIC OFFICIALS.
ONE SHEET TRIES TO TELL
MAN DEAD FOR TWO
YEARS,
CLAIMING csEABURY's STAND.
He Admits Everything In the Pa
Ders Referred to, Almost,
Is False.

The quantity of idle gossip which has
| been INDUCED in and found it's way into
some of the Twin City papers anent
| the selection of stone for the conStruc-
ton of the new state house has caus-
ed several Of the members Of the cap
itol commission much annoyance and
has had the effect of producing a gen
eral misunderstanding as to the real
situation.
When the statement was first made
two or three days ago by morning
paper that a fight was on in the COM
mission, some of the members faVoring
home quarried stone, and others stone
from other states, the stone men them
selves and the contractors themselves
beseged the office of the commission
and that Of the capitol architect, using
legitimate but energetic means to push
their own especial interests. The COM
mission could do nothing, and so ad-
journed until Mr.. Gilbert can-undis-
turbed-get into shape the estimates OF
the various bidders. The fact that ne
has not yet accomplished this should
be ample proof that the question or Sc
lecting any certain kind Of stone has
not been brought up for the commits
sion's considerat ton. Sensational stories
have been published about this man
leading the fight for Minnesota stone,
against three or four other members,
and all that sort of thing, until the
commissioners became sick OF 1T all
and dispersed until the bids could De
put in definite shape. Charming Sea-
bury, the president of the commission,
naturally feels that this talk of division
in the commission or fights for local
interests, ETC., is an affront upon the
body of which he is president.
Rather than stir up foment regard
ing the matter the commissions secre-
tary, Frank Hanson, was seen and was
reported in the G l o b e to the effect
that the commission had not even in
formally discussed the selection Of a
stone for the capitol, and this state
ment has been corroborated by Mr..
Seabury, in spite of which the Mime
apolis Journal yesterday printed par
agraph on the subject, which, although
brief. annoyed Mr.. Seabury in the eX-
IRENE.
1t is as follows:
-. THE STONE QUESTION.
How the Commission Really Stands on the
-Aai5 Question.
In speaking Of the division of sentiment
in the capitol commission the. other day.
the Journal said that three members were
for home stone, three for Indiana stone and
one on the fence Since that time man has
been found who knows all about the de-
bate in the commission, and from him a
Journal reporter this morning found out
just who of the members are for the lndi-
ana stone who for Kettle River stone, and
who on the fence. Ed Weaver, as stated at
that time, is the leader OF the home stone
party His backers on the GO commission n are n
Graves, of Duluth. Charming Seabury, of
St. Paul, is the leader of the Indiana stone
party, and is Endorsed by George A. Du
Toit of Chaska, and James McHench, of
Farmont John De Laittre, of Hennepin
county, is the member who doesn't yet know
whether he wants the capiaol built of Mn
nesota stone or stone from Indiana.
Here is what Mr.. Seabury says:
James McHench. of Fairmont, died IN
May, 1895, and his place on the commission
was taken by Daniel Shell, of Worthington.
When Mr.. Shell resigned early in 1896 the
position was vacant for some time and was
recently filed by the naming of Ed Weaver,
of Mankato, who has sat with us twice, but
who has listened to what said by those
who appeared before US, and who has not, as
far as l know, expressed his views on the
stone matter, nor been obliged to lead any
fights in favor of using Minnesota stone.
The commission has not discussed this mat
ter, a morning paper to the contrary not
withstanding and any views held by the
members are, in my judgment, private, per
sonal, informal, undecided, and based
upon what has been said. No talk has been
had, and 1 WILL say that no member has
expressed himself in my hearing in favor of
any stone from Minnesota or any other state
This morning paper to which | refer used
a story which contained single fact, and
which l do not believe inspired or
authorized by any member of the board.
cannot too strongly deprecate the introduce
have an important duty to perform. This
capitol is to last for many years after we
have gone, and it behooves us to give all
the details connected with its construction
the faireSt sort of consideration. / believe
every member feels that all other things
being equal, we should use Minnesota stone
l say this but we have at no time even
exchanged views on the subject We are
acting under law which contempates that
the best interests of the state be conserved
and without this law the members
would naturally feel like using the home
product If all things are feasible.
The whole story in the Minneapolis paper
is nonsense, and as accurate as the ridfcu-
lous statement about Mr. McHench who is
resting peacefully-let us hope-in his grave
IF the people will only believe that we
every care to the details of the work, feel
that we have a big responsibility, we will
get along better than with this constant
Earring and criticism and misrepresenta-
tion.''
MONTY FOR THE MONUMENT.