The Carlisle independent., 1907-05-09
CAPITOL INQUIRY
- Exhaustive Report, Taking Up In Detail the Charges and Criticisms Made Upon Material and CompIi- ance With Specifications.
CAPITOL INVESTIGATING COMMIT TEE MAKES REPORT TO
 LEGISLATURE.

TEE MAKES REPORT TO
 LEGISLATURE.
 The Joint Committee on State Capitol ap- pointed the part of the Senate and House of Representatives for the purpose of investi- gating the construction of the state house, submitted their report to the Legislature on May 3.
 The report is very full and complete. going into details all points. After a lengthy preamble, showing their appointment, organiza- tion, place of meeting. how and why they selected c. B. Striekler of Washington D. C., expert architect to aid them in their invesu- gation, etc, the charges and findings are taken up in numerical order
 Following is a synopsis of the committee port:
 CD Character of Stone.
 It has been charged that the stone used in the basement story and that used in the stories above materially different and that the stone in the upper stories is vastly in- ferier to that in the basement story From the findings of the committee and from the opinion of all of the experts who have exam.ued the building the committee is of the opinion that the stone used in the upper stories of the state capitol comes well within the class of marble designated in the specifications as class A. The stone in the upper stories seems to be stained or discolored. but we assured by the expert employed by the committee that those stains will disappear in time, and your committee in that respect must rely upon what the expert has said about the matter.
 (2) Cement and Turing.
 Criticism has been made that the contractors should have used Puzzelano cement in the upper stories of the building and that the walls should have been furred We find that the use of the Batesville marble taken from the second quarry is substantial compliance with the contract, and that the two stones are pFacu- cally the stone.
 (3) Bush Eammering Stone in Basement Walls
 Instead of Using ''No 8 Cut Work
 It has been charged that the contractors have bush hammered the stone in the basement story instead of having it finished by the method known S-eut work. Your committee find that s-cut work is used only upon granite and not upon limestone.
 (z) Granite Base Course.
 Under the contract. specifications and plans the graIite kase cdNse43ras to be finely polished. The commissioners decided to have the base course pin nhammered instead of polished and ordered that change, taking credit of S1,6oo Under the law they had authority to make the change and from the best information We have been able to gather the credit taken for same was reasonable and just.
 (5) Thickness of Stone.
 It has been charged that the ashler stone used in the construction of the building does not comply with the plans, specifications and contract in reference to the thickness. In order to ascertain the average thickness of the stone 6ed your committee had number of holes bored through the stone in order that they would be enabled to measure the same.
  average from four to eight inches, some of the stone being much thicker and reaching entirely through the wall. The plans appear to the committee to show that this stone shall be six inches The general average of the stone is considerably greater than six inches-
 (6) Eight Columns on West Front.
 It has been charged that the contract has been violated in that the contractors have eight free columns on the west front of the capitol We find that the commissioners agreed to pay the contractors for the construction of these pillars or columns and the arehitraves over same S27,246. The main drawings of the building show that these columns were erased, while the columns appear upon the west eleya- ton.
 Your committee is of the opinion that under the contract. the contractors could not be quired to put In the columns without extra cost.
 CD Fluting of Columns
 Considerable has been said with reference to the fact that the columns the east and west front have not been huted. The tractors frankly admit it is their duty. under the contract to flute the said columns, but they contend they be futed better after they are set up than before. The expert ployed by the committee advised us that tn. columns be futed after they constructed and that. in fact, il is preferable to have them iuted afterward.
 (s) Concreting Columns in Subbasement.
 One of the extras paid for by the commis- sioners to the contractors for concreting the iron pillars in the sub basement; for this the commissioners paid the contractors s 25T. .31. Under the contract it was not the duty of the contractors to concrete the columns referred to and do not believe that the concrete. which is from two to four feet thick, adds anything to the strength of the column the safety of the building and that the only purpose it can possibly serve is to protect the pillars. While the committee does not believe the action of the commission in this respect wise yet they clearly had authority to have that work wp he for fha is reasonable.
 (s) Old and New Brick.
 Complaint has been mace against the missioners for the that they purcha sed new brick at cost aggregating s4l GOO. while the state had great number of brick that were taken out of the old penitentiary all ready upon the ground a part of which cleaned and ready for use. The commissioners explain by saying that the old brick upon the ground brittle and some of them had been put up with concrete instead of mortar and that 1t was their purpose, in purchasing the new brick to put the new brick in the main wall of the lower stories of the building and nse the old brick in the upper stories where they would have to sustain much less load, and use them also in construction of power house which it will necessary to build.
 (10) Construction of the Basement Floor.
 It has been contended that it was the duty of the contractors to construct the basement floor. Upon this question the members of the committee divided
 In view of the fact that members of the committee in their opinions are at variance upon this proposition we would recommend that the matter be submitted by the board to the attorney general for his opinion and that if. in the opinion of the attorney general, the board has made q payment which was not authorized then the matter should be taken up for set tlement between the board, the attorney general and the contractors
 CID Fireproofing.
 The system of freproofing used by the con tractors has been very severely criticised The system rsed was the reinforced expanded metal cinderf 1eacrete. It seems to your committee that the tc9kract has been complied with.
 In connesA sn with the fire proofng we wish to say that en top of the floor it is our opin- ion that the building is fre-proof but that