The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1904-02-24

our pleasure to prosecute either or |
both to the extent OF the law. Any |
facts In the possession of this commits |
sion. either matters of official record
or matters OF personal knowledge in !
connection with the work on the state
mouse. Will be fully and frank , given |
under oath to any attorney or attorneys
that the legislature, governor or any
otner properly constituted authority I.
may appoint to prosecute suits in the
interest OF tile State. This commits
sion. under the provisions OF the law
constituting 1t, elected an architect and
paid him the usual fees to design and
superintend the work Of completion OF
the provision OF the law, let the work
to the lowest bidder. II there has
been any collusion between the archi-
tect and the contractor II is a fact abb
soluteiy unknown and unsupported by
the state house commission, and there
has not been published or produced Il
scintilla of evidence to prove that any
such collusion existed.
CAN WE AFFORD TO PAY FOR
MAGNIFICENCE?
| When the commission was appointed
to complete the State house the scope
OF It's duty was clearly marked out in
the act creating II. II was required
by the law to complete the State house
within the appropriation OF $1T5,O
When the fact is considered that the
State house as 1t stood in it's incomplete
condition had cost the State of South
Carolina over s2.000,O00. it would have
mission to attempt with the limited
amount given us to carry out the de-
sign OF the original architect. who de-
signed and contemplated a S5.000.000
building. The act further stipulated
that not one dollar Of the money ap-
propriated should be expended until
a contract for the completion Of the
building within the amount stipulated
was made. and this contract we were
directed to make and did make. It
mas been the purpose OF the commits
sion in the expending Of the limited sum
at our disposal to make all permanent
work good and substantial, to conform
ms near as possible to the original
building. and II there has been, as al
legged, cheap and shoddy work" put
upon the building. an investigation will
reveal that such work can be easily re-
moved at any time. without marring
IN any way the substantial portions
Of the building, and that 1t can be re-
placed by as costly material as the
State cares to pay for. Only 81 200
was spent for the roof. This roof it
was believed, would be satisfactory;
1t has not proven so it can be easily
replaced by as expensive q structure as
you wish and In the meantime 1t will
have served the purpose. The COM
mission In this matter, as In many
others involving questions of the re-
ods Of construction. relied 20 q iaTkt
extent upon the judgment Of the archi.
tect. AS business men they felt that
the vide and varied experience Of the
men I'hom they had entrusted with
the power and authority Of an archi-
tect. which must of necessity be extern
sive, justified them in deferring to
n his Judgment and advice. This arch.
itect was necessarily governed by the
amount appropriated for the work,
and. of course. could use only such ma
terial as the appropriation would pay
for.
The limited funds placed at our dis
posal Is the only reason that any part
OF this work Is inferior in charact er
to the best work on the old portions
OF this buiidingS :, IN l.
We do not wish. however. to be un-
derstood as apologizing for. the present
day an imposing and stately structure
n ana "a credit and an honor to South
Carolina, and the new work, as well
as the old, will stand for centuries.
While the interior OF the new work
has not been e.nbellished with italian
marble and with delicate carvings by
imported artists, 1t, was not believed
BY the compissIon, that the people Of
south caEoiinn either desired or pur-
posed ta ahavs them now. When they
things they can be placed there. But
this criticism can be made of the old
portions of the building, as we'll as the
neTsand notw outstanding the so-called
$1,000 galvanized ceiling liable, in the
words of this architect, Hunt" to
rust, out In a few years." whicf, was
placed there by the commission, Of
which Senator Marshall was a mem
ridor Of the building was, unsightly
and unadorned by the beautiful marble
with which john IF. ENiernsee designed
\ to cover It's walls.
I AS TO THE sEEEcT1oN OF
THE ARCHITECT.
In selecting an architect for the work
It was the sincere desire OF the com
mission to put aside personal consid-
erattons and to secure for the State the
services OF the best and most experi-
enced man whom we could find. Two
plans were presented to the commits
sion. while numerous architects were
suggested as thoroughly competent to
do|the. work. Six Of the ten members
OF the commission voted for Frank p.
adapted for the work contemplated.
Mr.. Milburn had not only enjoyed wide
experience in the erection Of public
buildings throughout the south, but
came ca with the prestige Of employment
| ton or all Its stations and buildings.
Besides, he had erected the Thompson
auditorium at Charleston, the court
house at Anderson. and other build
! 'n6ot "hCh "NAisl Tie personal RnOWl.
edge Of members Of the commission
had proven satisfactory and he was
as well highly recommended to us by
all with whom we knew he had had
dealings. 1t may be added that since
that time, Mr.. Aiilburn has been se-
lected as the architect OF. both the
I Florida and North Carolina State cap
ttols. Consequently. the commission
thought they were justified in the se-
lection, they had made. .j
| II the report of the foInt {nyestfpat.
ing committee, however. is followed to
Its logical conclusion. it ia evident that
It was the opinion Of that committee
that the commission made a mistake