Keowee courier. [volume] (Pickens Court House, S.C.) 1849-current, 1904-02-24

1T would be necessary for the State to
furnish column to replace the one
broken The column was portion OF
the material to be furnished by the
State under the contract and thcre
was no doubt y" g minds of ma
jority of the nj. sion. after care
ful examine, of the contract plans
and specific ms, that the commission
could have been compelled by the con-
tractor to furnish new column.
TO quarry. and carve q new column
would have cost the State at least
$4,000; 1t would have delayed the work
of completion of the State house about
six months.
column could be patched by putting in
section of new stone at q cost OF
about $500, and delay in the work of
30 days.
According to the plans there were to
be two columns placed within what is
now the open floor space on the front
portico. These columns supported none
OF the weight of the walls of the struc-
ture, and were located by the architect
within this area because under tho
approved plans the State had on hand
two columns that could be used for
purely ornamental purposes. The con-
tractor proposed to the commission
that he would deduct the cost of rails
ing these two inner columns into posi-
tion and the cost OF the unfinished
carving Of caps for same If they could
be left out, and the work proceed.
upon the report of the architect that
the strength of the structure of the
completed building would be in no
wise impaired this solution OF the
problem was deemed the best and most
| expedient. inasmuch as the funds in
the hands Of the commission We're
limited, the work would not be de-
layed and no damage would be done
the structure. At a subsequent meet
ing of the legislature the broken col
uInns were appropriated and given by
the state to Greenwood and Spartan
burg.
The question Of utility having been
settled to the satisfaction OF a ma
| 1ority of the commission it then be-
came one purely OF taste and ornament
| and upon this issue we considered that
| the best interests of the State were
| subserved by carrying to completion
| the front portico as it now stands
| 1t may be added that in the final vote
as to leaving out these two centre col
umns that Messrs. CAN'T and Johnson
voted with Mr.. Marshall in the mega
tive, the other members present con-
stltutlng majority, voting in the
affirmative.
In addition to the 5000 above men
toned as part OF the consideration
for relieving the contractor Of the work
of placing the columns the commits
/ sion reserved for the benefit OF the
| State the remnants of the broken COL
urnns.
THE CEILING IN THE MAIN
LOBBY.
One of the most serious charges
brought by the investigating commit
tee related to the removal of the cell
ing In the main lobby and this is n
! typlcal illustration Of their methods
and of the value of their conclusions
! Captain" Hunt in his testimony
| p. ~ swore that the State had lost
in his opinion $4,000 by the removal
h nntl ,l.s&
as STEEL ceiling and that had cost
IN the ncighborhood OF 100000" (p. 7.)
| Now, what are the facts?, The Off
cial records OF the old State house
commission show the awarding OF the
contract for this ceiling as follows
Columbia, S. c., May End, 1889. The
commission met this day. Present:
Hon. j: Q. Marshall, secretary of
State; Hon. j. S. Werner, comptroller
general. The bids were presented, be-
ing six in number for putting in iron
| (galvaniZe6 ceiling, beams, skylights,
etc, In the main corridor on the second
floor. together with the ceiling over
| the senate lobby. Mr. John
| Alexander's bid upon plan No. / for
! $I,S9S was accepted"
| Ihis record was accessible to the in
/ Vestigating committee and could have
! clearly shown them that this ceiling
did not cost "in the neighborhood of
| 100000" but that the ceiling of the
senate lobby, which had not been re-
moved, and the cornice of the main
lobby, which was still there, consti-
tuted three fourths of the work for
| which less than $4,000 had been paid
ana mat the ceiling that had been
removed cost 10 years ago. less than
s2:0oo. 1t is very plain piece Of work
| with little ornamcntation and Ger
tainly not beautiful. Architect Wilson
IN MS report stated that it could now
| pc put back for about 81 800
I This ceiling. rs thp rocorde chou, ,,,,,,,
not only bought as galvanized iron, but
an actual inspection of it will show
that the ceiling taken out was nothing
put galvanized iron. The committee
iound that the contractors bodily took
and carried away and converted TO
! their own use this valuable and bcauti-
iul part of the old building" o. y
when one of the five witnesses whom
they themselves put upon the stand
| ccrtlficG and could have told them that
1t was galvanized iron, and when re-
moved worthless even as junk" (See
aitidayit of j. b. Garfunltel, Exhibit
r.. Or. Babcock, superintendent of
me hospital for the Insane. certifes
sion as an officer of the State. (Sec
| certificate of J. w. Babcock, Exhibit
! y.
/ The commission put back exactly tho
same material they took out, simply
! requiring the contractor to replacc
! worthless and damaged material with
| new material of the same kind.
The wanton misrepresentation which
| it was necessary for this so-caiIcd
| architect" to make to show thar tbc
removal of dozen squares of gal
Vanizcd iron which was in bad shane.
Deht and rusted, and replacing IL with
other galvanized iron of pattern
when better suited the round opening
| or the dome cntaied n loss of S15 ono
| ipon the state, certainly entitled him
| 10 the compensation of $15 a day, which
| ne was paid and which he was owl
! dentiy industriously endeavoring to
If the ceiling removed cou,d ho
! properly designated as "steel ceiling
tnat put I'm It's place could be so desig-
mated as 1t Is the same material, If