The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1904-03-02
The Whole Thing q Meas.
Snartanhurg Herald.

Some one has said-or If not, SOM
one ought to have said-that in ever.
quarrel one party is wrong, ant
generally both. When the STATE
House Investigating Committee made
its report to the State Legislature
few weeks ago we said, in effect, tha'
they showed up a very bad slt1atlor
with respect to the State House
"eompletion, and we expressed the
belief that their conclusions With
respect to the character of the WORE
done on the State House were pro6a'
bly correct. As to the blame for the
"shoddy" work, which is patent to
all we Preserved our Judgement" until
the State House commission which
had charge of the work had been
given an opportunity of explaining.
On another page today we publish the
bulk of this commissions rejoinder.
Now, after having read all the re-
ports, replies, explanations, charges
and counter-charges available, and
having ourselves seen much OF the
work on the State House, 1t is our
deliberate conclusion that the whole
business is q mess, including the
original commission, the architect, the
contractors, Senator Marshall, the
Investigating committee, and the
Legislature. The Legislature had no
business, in the first instance, to ex'
pect million dollar job for $l75, 600;
the commission PIT. 10 charge OF the
work erred in their selection OF an
architect, and were guilty of neglect
when they failed to draw their contract
30 specific and unmistakable In detail
that there could have been no question
about it, to which contract in every
detail the contracting company shoulo
have been strictly held, without
regard to whether'o or not they WOULD
come out even, would lose money
or make it; the architect misled the
members ofthe commission, apparent
~ he misrepresented things to them;
the contracting company bit off more
than 1t could chaw, made promises 1t
could not fulfill, then trusted to
Milburn and the leniency Of the COM
mission to let it.. Oft easy; finally,
Senator Marshall and the lnvestiga-
ting committee have been entirely too
Incorporate In their expressions, put
ting undue stress on things Of minor
importance, exaggerating losses TO
the State, and the investigating com
mittee has been decidedly one-sided
In its finding and unfair to the
members, of the former commission,
So, there we have hit 'em all, and
they all deserve it, but in the words OF
the commission, repeated by Senator
Aldrich Of the other side, there Ia In
our remarks ''nothing extenuate and
paught set down in malice"
AS It appears to US, and as we said
at first, the State House commission
In charge Of the work had q hard and
thankless task. We are satisfied they
did their work conscientiously and
honestly. They made mistakes-yery
naturally. We have yet to hear of a
public building committee that has
not made mistakes. When we consid-
er how proverbial 1t Is that q man
must build three residences before get
ting one to suit him, it Is not to be ex-
pected that q public committee iDI
charge of building can satisfy them
selves, much less satisfy every one In
the State. So,while still we maintain
that the work has been abominably
done and the commission is not by.
any means blameless, yet they should;
not be too severly censured, as weI
think the Investigating committee has
done.
We do not admire the manner ipI
which leading members of this Inves-I
tigating committee have acted since
making their report. i, In spite of lar
guage In their report which 1t Is hard
to construe into anything lessthan the
severest censure of the State House
commission, they have declared on theE
floors of the Legislature that they had
no intention Of rejecting upon the
commission. Moreover, they have
apparently been very active in their
efforts to prevent the censured COM
mission from securing hearing be-
fore the Legislature. This conduct.
seems to US Of questionable taste, to!
say the least of 1t.