The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1904-02-24

f - oAihNAoa iSSStNt
or matters of personal knowledge in
connection with the work on the State
house, will be fully and frankly given
under oath to any attorney or attorneys
That the legislature, governor or any
other properly constituted authority
may appoint to prosecute suits in the
interest of the State. This commits
sion, under the provisions OF the law
constituting it, elected an architect and
paid him the usual fees to design and
superintend the work of completion OF
the capitol. The commission, under
the provision of the law, let the work
to the owest bidder. If there has
been any collision between the archi-
tect n h contractor 1t is n fact abb
solutely unknown and unsupported by
the State hous commission, and there
has not been published or produced q
scintilla OF evidence to prove that any
such collision existed.
CAN WE AFFORD TO PAY FOR
MAGNIFICENCE?
When the commission was an tinted
to complete the State house I cope
or its duty was clearly marked [ in
the act creating It.. 1t was re. uired
within the appropriation of SIZE, 900.
When Tho fact is considered that the
state house as ii stood in it's incomplete
condition had cost the State of South
Carolina over $4,000 600, it would n v
been the height OF folly for our COM
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 S. DOC, 900
building. The act further stipulated
that not II dollar of the money aD-
propriated should be expended until
n contract for the completion Of the
building within the amount stipulated
was made, and this contract we were
directed to make II did make. 1t
has been the purpose of the commits
sion i'll the expanding of the limited sum
at our disposal to make all permanent
work good and substantial. to conform
as near as possible to the original
building, and if 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 ut any time, without morring
In II way the substantial portions
of he building. and that it can be re-
placed by as costly material as the
State cares to pay for. Only 1920
was spent for the roof. This roof it
was believed, would be satisfactory;
II 1T has not proven so 1t can be easily
replaced by as expensive a structure as
you wish and In the meantime it will
have served the purpose. The com
mission In this matter, as IN many
others involving questions of the re-
lative quality of materials and meth
OBS OF construction. relied to a large
extent upon the judgment OF the archi.
tect. AS business men they felt that
the wide and varied experience OF the
men whom they had with
the power n authority of an archi-
tect, which must of necessity be extern
siVe. justified them in deferring to
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 his work is inferior in character
to the best work on the old portions
of this building.
We do not wish, however. To he nm
derstood as apologizing for the present
condition OF the state house. 1t is to-
day an imposing and stately structure
and a credit and an honor to South
Carolina, and the new work, as we'll
as the old, will stand for centuries.
While the interior of the new work
has not been embcllished with Italian
marble and with delicate carvings by
imported artists. ii was not believed
by the commission that the people of
South Carolina either desired or pur-
posed to have them now. When they
are willing and able to pay for these
things they can be placed there. But
TINS criticism can be made of the old
portions of the building, as we'll as the
new. and Notwithstanding the so-called
$4,000 galvanized ceiling liable, in the
words of this architect. Hunt to
rust OUT in n fow years,' winch was
placed there by the commission. OF
which Senator Marshall was n mem
Der, hfteen years ago the main cor
ridor of the building was unsightly
and unadorncd by the beautiful marble
with which John II. Niernscc designed
to cover its walls.
AS TO THE SELECTION OF
THE ARCHITECT.
IN selecting an architect for the work
II was the sincere desire of the COM
mission to put aside personal consid-
erations and to secure for the State the
services of the best II most experi-
enced man whom we could find. Two
pans 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.
Milburn whose plans seemed best
adapted Tor the work contemplated.
MIR. MilbIrn n not only enjoyed wide
experience in the erection of public
buildings throughout the south. but
came with the prestige of employment
by the Southern railway for the cree
tion OF all it's stations and buildings.
BeSides. he had erected the Thompson
auditorium at Charleston, the court
mouse at Anderson, and other build
ings. which, within the personal knowi-
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. MIR. Milburn has been se-
lccted as the architect of both the
FLORIDA and North Carolina State cap
itols. Consequently, the commission
thought they were justified In the Sc
lection they had made.
If the report of the Joint Investigate
ing COMMITTEES. however. is followed to
It's logical conclusion. 1t is evident that
1t was the opinion of that committee
that the commission made a mistake
in clecting an architect at all, but thai
we should have ent to Washington for
a hangcr-on around the national capt.
toll, to instruct us no only how to erect
a building, but incidentally to show
how TO avoid insulting the memory of
a distinguished architect and imposing
a disgrace upon the state Of South
Carolina.
AS TO THE SUFFICIENCY