The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1904-02-24

timer columns from the front portico
the contractors made a profit Of 3,400,
and the estimated loss to the State is
$4,500.
That the public may fully understand
this matter. I wish to call attention to
the fact, that when called to this work
II found a partially completed building.
much valuable stone. and marble on
Inland, and an appropriation wholly and
admittedly insufficient to complete the
building as originally designed. When
7 made the plans. it was to utilize all
the very expensive columns then lying
on the sround, and considered fit for
use, that largely induced me to pro-
vide for two inner columns on the front
portico. It turned out with this work.
as is generally the case in remodeling
old, or partially completed buildings,
that many notifications ana changes
became necessary, and were made with
the consent and approval of the COM
mission, as rule Col. Marshall being
the only one dissenting. In hosting
these massive columns into position,
one of them broke by its own weight
when being removed from Its position
on the ground. An examination set
tied beyond question that there was a
defect in the stone, which then showed
an old crack about two thirds OF the
way through 1t was generally pc
!: lieved and conceded that the loss fell
upon the State The matter was
promptly reported. T was Of the opin-
ion, and am still, that it was then best
to omit the two inner columns, because
there would be more floor space, be-
cause the architectural features would
be Just as good, because with slight
changes (omitting wood truss and
substituting steel trussed perlins) the
strength Of the structure would not
be impaired in the least: because it
would save much time in completing
the work, and because it would save
rather than cost the State anything.
The contractors offered to furnish a
new column for $4,000, necessitating
several months delay; or, piece the
broken column for $500, causing a de-
lay Of one month, or change the plans.
and omit the two columns, causing no
delay, and deduct from the contract
price $500, which it was shown by an
itemized statement would be saved to
the contractors by the change. With
all this information before the COM
mission, after full considera ton, it de-
cided, by a vote Of to 8, to change
the original plan and omit the two
columns. thus saving to the State $500,
without detriment to the work, and
| giving these columns to the State for
monumental purposes.
Mr.. Hunt talks about the stone lin
tel and brick work on top Of these col
umns" The specifications never called
for any such thing. And yet this will
ing witness, unable to condemn the
sufficiency Of the "bracing and anchor
! ing" goes out. Of MS way to suggest
carelessness in "a great portion Of the
construction throughout this building"
! Again, this government" witness
says the two massive square pillars.
under the portico, now perform no
duty at all" Any sane person can see
for himself that these piers, originally
constructed principally to- support the
two inner columns, since the change
support much Of the portico. And it
was to get such a witness that the in
yestigating committee passed over SO
many southern architects and con-
fractions of known ability and integ-
rity.
Fifth That the new leaf work on
the capitals is not as fine as the old.
It being impracticable to get the
stone for this new work from the old
quarry, stone was selected which
! cepted with the bid Of the contractors,
/ the only slight difference, and which
is not appreciable, in the work on the
capitals, is due to the fact. that the
Pacolet granite is trife softer and
therefore not suceptible to quite so
high finish.
1! Sixth. That Intel stones should ex-
tend from columns at the rear of the
portico to corresponding front columns,
where there are sheet iron boxes paint
ed to resemble granite.
! That is just according to the plans
and specifications, frst-clasS galvan-
lied iron being used. which was as
igood as could be afforded with the ap-
preparation, and answers every pur-
4 pose.
! In reference to the glass floor which
leaks in rainy weather, beg to say it
does leak, and I regret it.. In my ef-
fort to give all the light possible to
the Offices and passageWays below, I
selected this style of floor light, which
! is suitable for the place. Unfortunately
it all I. possibly could to connect with
the granite work and the height Of the
second floor doorway entering the lob
/ by. This is no fault Of mine;
it is one of the troubles en-
countered in rennodeling or adding to
a building: The chief trouble, how
ever, with the portieo floor Is that
to accommodate the legislature, it was
laid just before the meeting of that
body and was walked on and abused
before the concrete and cement mate
rial set sufficiently. The natural con-
sequence was that it was damaged and
still presents a bad appearance. An
inspection of the rear portico. floor.
which was not so used and abused, will
substantiate this contention.
AS to the ceiling of the portico, I do
not know OF any material more suit
able for such ceilings. It is made from
! the same class Of material that was
removed by the contractors from the
4 main lobby, although not the same de-
! sign. l won6er.if the gentlemen Of the
investigating committee know that the
portico ceiling in the main entrance
to the United States capitol at Wash
ington was common plasterins, and
that leaks from the roof caused some
of it to fail.
! Seventh. That the roof is "tar and
gravel" roof, unsuitable, and leaks
! badly.
It is not a tar and gravel roof. but
is of the very finest quality of asphalt
and crushed quartz. and there is no
doubt about its answering the purpose
for at least ten years. as the roof con-
tractors gave guarantee for ten years
against leaks and material wear and
tear This same class Of roofing is on
the following buildings in the city Of
Washington. D. c.:
Atlantic Coast Line Office building,