The Bamberg herald. [volume] (Bamberg, S.C.) 1891-1972, 1904-02-25


months. / received a note from the
secretary Of the committee, dated
Bacnweil. $. c.. Dec. Z. 1908. bur mailed
in Colunbi;,, ilth December. giving me
an opportunity TO appear before the
committee il | desired. Having heard
Of the proceedings in May, at which J.
was told, and believed. Col. Marshall
had been present, l decided, without
having counsel. that l had best not
appear unless the committee desired nay
presence, had been guilty Of absolute
ly no wrong. or conscious neglect Of
any duty to the State, but had given
my best efforts TO assist the capitol
commission in the discharge OF it's du-
ties and the proper expenditure OF the
States money. hence l had nothing to
explain away. But knowing that had
modified and detailed drawings in my
Office not on file in the State house,
l offered to place my office records at
the disposal Of the committee. In this
connection | see that my note to the
committee has been termed curt l
wish 70 disciain any such intention;
and il it is. I regret it. and plead in eX-
tenuatiOn the fact that I began the
struggle for bread early in life, and had
not the opportunities OF collegiate edu-
cation enjoyed by some members Of the
investigating committee.
But in justice to the capitol commits
sion, which with one exception ap-
proved my work, as we'll as to myself
and family, I wish to, say something in
regard to the specific findings Of the
investigating committee, in the order
stated.
First. AS to the charge that
the plans and specifications filed with
the secretary Of state were not suitable
and complete.
I believe this was the first objection
made by Col Marshall after my elec-
ton as architect, and was fully con-
sidered and passed upon bv the capitol
commission in the year 1900, Mr.. Mar
shall alone dissenting. At that time
the commission had before it letters
from four Of the most prominent con-
tractors and builders of this section
of the country. who, after studying
those plans carefully to base upon
them bids for very large SUM OF
money, secured by heavy BOND, hao
bid upon this work. Some OF these
gentlemen were personally known 10
members of the commission, and thelr
statements were to the effect that the
drawings and specifications were plain
enough to make an intelligent bid tnat
the plans and specifications were fully
understood, and We're proper for good
work. The opinion of such Well known
contractors and builders as Gude u
Walker. J. w. Bishop & Co., w. A.
Chesterman and Nicholas 1ttner COM
monty known as Honest Nick, must
outweigh the opinion OF Mr.. MarsnaA
and the washington expert with any
impartial judge.
Second. That the contract fixed the
old work on the completed portion OF
the building as the standard.
This is not true. There Is nothing III
the plans and specifications Whlcn
could be so construed except, perhaps
the word prototype" on one or the
general drawings, and this was lnIeno-
ed to apply only to style, outline, form,
shape: and was not intended to apply
to the classification of the workman
ship. Under each Of the headings OF
the various classes Of work the same
was fully outlined, giving the numoer
of cuts to the inch for the different
parts Of the work.
In this connection, I may say that
it was not intended to make the stone
cornice in one piece, for instance. The
small appropriation for the whole work
necessitated great economy, ana
the scale detail drawings show that lt
was to be built up Of several members,
as it was done, instead OF the more eX-
pensive one-piece cornlce.
Referring to sheet of the general
drawings where the note before re-
ferred to is found, it will be seen that
the work is to be the same only When
il has it's prototype in the old building.
That it does not mean that the cornice,
for instance. is to be Identical with the
old work, you have only to see sheet i
Of those same drawings, where the
cornice is distinctly shown to be built
up of several pieces.
Third. That the State at a great ex-
pense, in the neighborhood of S10,0Oo,
had splendid steel ceiling in the main
lobby, which the contractors TOOK
and converted to their own use, where-
by the State lost in the neighborhood
of $4,000.
The plans and specifications required
the contractors to cut circular open
ing into the ceiling for the inner dome.
When the ceiling was cut, and 1t was
thoroughly examined, 1t was found 10
be galvanized iron, in a bad condltlon
and difficult to work into shape, es-
pecially as it contained ceiling hghts
no longer of use. The contractors SAID
It would require special Workmen ana
considerable loss Of time to patcn IL
Up. and would not then be as satls7
factory as a new ceiling, which could
be gotten in less time, and enable them
to be ready for the meeting Of the
legislature, although the new ceiling
would cost them more. After full in
yestigation of all the facts and con-
ditions, I decided that it was to
the interest of the State to accept the
proposed change, and approved the
ceiling they used, which harnonizes
perfectly with the design Of the CELL
ing under the balcony around the mann
lobby, which was placed there nncer
lMr. Niernsee's supervision. AS coth
ceilings are in the same lobby and are
seen at the same time, harmony is es-
sential. Neither the cornice nor cove
mouldings in this lobby were interfered
with, but the new ceiling was used only
in the field or body Of the ceiling
through which the dome is cut. The
contractors thought they ought to nave
extra for this new ceiling, but would
not allow it, and the State got the
new ceilings without cost.
This item shows the fearful mistake
the investigating committee made IN
not examining farther into the real
facts instead Of giving so much Welsnt
to that minority report. They would
have the public believe that It was a
steel ceiling" costing in the neighoor-
hood of $4,000, when the records IN the
secretary Of states Office show that all
the ceilings and cornices, steel beams,
and skyliglts in the rotunda, or man
lobby, and the ceiling over the senate
lobby together, cost only $7,S98, on the
,2d of May, 1889. Any we'll Informed
man will know that the cornice actuai-
ly cost much more than the ceiling.