The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1904-02-25

the contractors mace a pfONr OIL $3, 4UU,
and the estimated loss to the State is
$500.
That the public may fully understand
this matter, / wish 10 call attention to
the fact, that when called to this work
/ found a partially completed building,
much valuable stone and marble en-
hand, and an appropriation wholly and
admittedly insufficient to complete the
building as originally designed. When
made the plans, it was 70 utilize all
the very expensive columns then lying
on the ground, and considered fit for
use. that largely induced ne to pro-
vide for two inner columns on the front
portico. It turned out with this work,
Is is generally the case in remodeling
old. or partially completed buildings,
that many notifications and changes
became necessary, and We're made with
the consent and approval Of the COM
mission, as a rule Col. Marshall being
the only one dissenting. In -hoisting
these massive columns into position,
one Of them broke by its own weight
when being removed from its position
cn the ground. An eXamira ton 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. It was generally be-
lieved and conceded that the loss fell
upon the State. The matter was
promptly reported. I 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 feat would
be just as good, because with slight
changes (omitting wood truss and
substituting stee3 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 $1,000, 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
lternized statement would be saved to
the contractors by the change. With
all this information before the COM
mission, after full consideration, it de-
cided, by vote of 5 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
suMciency Of the 'bracing and anchor
ing," goes out of his way to suggest
carelessness in "a great portion Of the
construction throughout this building
Again, this government" witness
says the two massive square pillars,
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
vestigating committee passed over sc
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 irpracticabie to get the
stone for this new work from the old
quarry, stone was selected which
matched it exactly, and the same ac-
cepted with the bid Of the contractors,
the only slight difference, and which
is not apprecia bic, in the work on the
capitals, is due to the fact that the
Pacolet granite is trif1e softer anG
therefore. not Suceptiple to quite SO
high finish.
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
preparation, and answers every pur-
pose.
In reference to the glass floor which
leaks in rainy weather, I beg to say it
does leak, and I regret it.. In my ef-
fort to give all the light possible to
the Offices and passag geways below,
selected this style Of floor light, which
is suitable for the place. Unfortunately
there is but little fall, and yet gave
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;
countered in remodeling or adding to
a building. The chief trouble, how
ever, with the portico 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. 1t is made from
the same class Of material that was
removed by the contractors from the
main lobby, although not the same de-
sign l wonder if the gentlemen Of the
investigating committee know that the
portico ceiling in the main entrance
to the United States capitol at Wash
inston was common plastering, and
that leaks from the roof caused some
Of it to fall
Seventh. That the roof is tar and
gravel roof, unsuitable, and leaks
badly.
1t is not 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 a guarantee for ten years
against leaks and material wear and
tear. This same class OF roofing is on
S,, Ojfv Nf