The Guthrie daily leader. [volume] (Guthrie, Okla.) 1893-1996, 1911-06-05

construction Of capitol building
Rivalry among the three cities, can.
didates under the act. was so In
tense that offers for donations Of
land sufficient 20 carry out the H.
nanclai conditions OF ine bill 80
tnat a state capital building costing
not less that sl,S00n0N would be Oh.
tanned ~ the state, free from cost
10 the taxpayers.
Oklahoma City offered 10 donate
if permanent location Of csnlt& g4i
Gxed there, 1900 acres Of FpffI Eh ~
this offer was, cousideredb fKS III n
Is attestea By the result eF FMS eleH
ton. a.
or necessity litigation followed the
attempt TO enforce the provisions OF
The Initiated act and the 9sgheft
court oi the state declared the aet1n'
valid and the election void.
The third legislature was 2anyehT
ed in extraordinary session for The
purpose OF passing remedial and
curative laws sufficient 70 over
come the objections found IN the IN
itlated bin
The only question upon which the
legislature hesitated in preparing
new legislation IN conformity with
the initiated bill Was the location OF
the land The state capita commits
sion, appointed under the terms Of
the initiated bin after considering
all offers OF sites made by persons
representing the different interests
In Oklahoma City, selected what was
designated as the Putnam Site
only one other site was earnestly ad
yoeated, "Culhertson8 or North
East Site
The capital commission gave a.
It's chief reason for the selection ol
the putnam site over the Northeast
site that In IT'S Judgment a sum SUI
flcient 10 construct and equip a
capitol building costing total OF ST.
100000 could be realized from the
sale OF such lots In such site and
that IN Rs judgment it was doubtful
II such an amount could be realized
out of the Northeast site.
That the judgment Of the commits
sion was correct can be best attest.
ed by subsequent events.
The legislature selected the Nortt
east site and enacted a law locating
the capital at Oklahoma City ant
designated the Northeast site as thu
actual site of the seat OF government
and the buildings incidental there
to Litigation followed in the waR'
Of this bill and the supreme court o.
4 the United States declared the bill
valid Thus was ended the turinoi
| al far as other cities In the itatt
we're concerned with one exception
the keeping Of faith by Oklahoma
City In its promises. II promised e
the tax payers OF the state free
capitol and this promise coupled
with its presumed ability to CARR
it into effect, Is responsible for th'
seat Of government being located II
its midst Reliable reports from th'
capital city are to the effect tina
the sacred promise Is to be violated
II the such violation can be effect
| ed By the representative of that cit,
and the donors OF the Northeast site
AN attempt is now being made 7
have a special session OF the leglsla
ture called for the purpose OF appro
| priating an additional Si,000,000 a
under the plea that a building cost
| ing 100000 as contemplated In tn
Northeast site proposition. Il no
adequate for a great state. This Pile
ii only subterfuge to cover the rea
motive The promoters Of tn
Northeast site realize that 1t will no
bring on sale the necessary $1,000
000 and that prospective purchaser
so realize and hesitate to invest u
lots on said site until activity Of al
undoubted character Is made in tn
erection of the capitol building
! Hence the real object In seeking tn
appropriation ID apparent
The judgment Of the state capltc
commission Is confirmed Olllaho
ma City will have to make good tn
taxpayers Of the state have a righ
to and do demand II
Our troubles are over yours an
iusi beginning