The Batesburg advocate. [volume] (Batesburg, S.C.) 1901-1911, February 25, 1904, Supplement, Image 6
8k
dition which must necessarily surround
Kara thes? eioseta as Ions as they were so
BrcKaPF located. Realising the importance of
such conveniences, and being convinced
that some provision f- r them'
1 -xust be made before the permanent j
HpaK.i,? v^rfc on the State house wua completed.
the commission sought to provide a
different, more convenient and safer
locality in */Tfce building for these
closets. These new closets were not
contemplated when the question of
' completing the State house came before
the general assembly, nor were
there any plans, speciilcatlons or con- ,
trdct relating thereto: but the commis- j
sion believing that out of the uppro- ;
prlation enough had been saved to in- |
- stall these necessaries, ipude such contract
with reference to them as justifies
us in courting the most rigid investigation.
At the time the fixtures I
were installed there was no sewerage
system in the city of Columbia, and no ; ]
% municipal regulations ooverimr detniiu :
which though adopted for the sake of <
uniformity and governmental regu- ,
latton are but arbitrary. Since this in- .
stallatlon there has been no complaint MI
of the presence or suspicion of the ex- |
istence of sewer gas. and the location ,
of the jclosets Is such that If the pres- ,
ence did actually ?xist there could be j (
no detriment to the health or lives of
the occupants of the State house.
This determination on the part of the
committee to make this arrangement
whs most fortunate, as subsequent .
events proved, for the discovery was J
about that time made that the old
water closets had been silently and un- x
suspectingly venting their gases 1
through secret and unknown flues in ]
the brick walls of the building into 1
the offices upon the lower floor and ?
spreading disease and death among the 1
State's employes. The commission of 1
sanitary experts appointed by Gov. J
Hey ward, while criticizing some de- , ;
nils of the new work, ordered the old '
closets peremptorily nnu immediately '
removed from the building, and in this 1
demand Mr. Edens, the sanitary In- '
spec tor of Columbia. Joined. The grates 1
or Are places In several of the offices *
were directly connected with these closets
and had to be hermetically 1
sealed until the old work was removed
from the building. 11|
The condemned closets had been in- ?
stalled at great expense to the State t
under the direction of the commission >
which erected the "splendid ten thous- 1
and dollar steel celling" in the main 3
lobby, nearly 15 years ugo. largely un- t
der the supervision of Senator Marshall.
who was then secretary of state, i i
We desire to impress upon you the : t
fact that you have not been put In pos- t
session of any evidence or statement as ,
to the apparent condition of the State ,
house upon the day when the accept- j ^
ance was made and the final install- t
ment paid to the contractor. We, t
therefore, inform you that when the .
work was accepted and the money paid N
a personal inspection by special com- v
mlttee of the commission was made i
V .?11 -w
...v.. all UL 119 uticssiunes, t r
appeared in perfect condition, and t
every stone laid under the contract {
was free from cracks or apparent defeots.
and this notwithstanding: a test '
period of nearly or quite a month had
elapsed from the date when the build- *
ing was tendered, during which period J
we were satisfied that a sufficient test r
had been made. During said period 1
there were several precipitations of '
rain, notably on the 12th day of May. ?
i 3902. when the rain began to fall about ?
2 o'clock in the morning and continued J '
until about 7 of the same morning. 1
during which time nenrly an inch of ' '
water fell. Rain followed again on '
the 14th. falling during the night, and t
on the 15th. when in 21 minutes 3-4 of I
an inch of rainfall was registered. <
Under this severe test the roof ap- j t
peared to be perfect as far as protec- 1
tion from water Is concerned. This 11
statement is made on official informa- i
tion given us by the United States uu- i
ttoorlties.
mJKgSS , We confess with the utmost candor ; t
that in some respects, particularly as i ?
to the roof and the floor lights, we have \ y
not been altogether pleased with the j t
result of the work. But these at the i
worst are not as serious as would have i
S. been blunders involving the construe- I
. tion of the stone work, und other more i
permanent portions of the building, t
which has come up .to the full measure I
of the expectation of the commission, t
It is well to remember, however, that i
we are too prone to dwell upon that ^
which has not come fully up to our t
expectations, while ignoring the fact .
that this man probably succeeded in i
more important matters where another t
would have been subjected to just i ;
criticism. ]
We have scrupulously avoided, either f
In this communication or in any of the ,
steps leading up to the opportunity ' ,
which has been accorded us by your t
honorable body to set ourselves right. ,
in making our cause common with that
of either the architect or contractor,
and have endeavored to divorce our- j
selves insofar as possible from them.
First of all, though out of otllce, we
are in a measure servants of the people
and of the general assembly, and if . t
that tribunal deems the State to have *
suffered injury from either, our first
duty is to the State.
However, it is but justice to say that }
we have found the contractors in ail 1
their dealings with us honorable husi- | 1
ness men, whom we believe to be above 1
suspicion of wrong doing, and who i 1
sougnt to live up to the true intent and lj
meaning: of their contract with the u
State. J!
We desire it understood that we do '*
not claim that it is impossible that im- s
positions have been practiced upon V
this commission by the architect or ''
contractor, for if any vital defects ex- I1
ist in the building: or serious mistakes U
can be shown to have been made, these ?
must have been the outcome of the "
commission having: been misled, but we 1
do assert in the most positive manner t
that the findings and the conclusions c
contained in the report of the joint in- "
vestigating committee are not sus- n
tnined by the evidence therein con- e
tained. and if they are ever sustnined fi
it must be by evidence produced before u
another tribunal. Whether this com- ! tl
mission or any of its members were c<
ever designedly or unintentionally im- v
posed upon or deceived by either arch- , b
Itect or contractor, it can only be v
proved out of the mouth or mouths of p
such member or members, unless it be 1 n
conceded that the members would com- ii
mlt perjury In order to hide the facts, d
We would remind your honorable h:
l>ody that this commission has not
deemed it to be its duty to go into th**
newspapers to defend the course of the r
majority, and that as but one side
has heretofore been presented to the
public, we realize that it is but natur 1
that (he conclusion should be drav .
that there has been but one side to th<
rpjestion. If. with all the facts before
you. you should conclude that the < ?<
man has been always right and the
nine men alwavs wi-nntr
plued in extenuation that we have ?t? ,
the U=rt we oouid for the State.
awed by influence, and unbrlbed by j-l
gain." In this report we have end-mv- N*
ored to state the facts fully, candidly I
and fairly, "nothing extenuate and Sl
naught set down In malice." (
All of which is respectfully submitted.
. , s,
M. B. McSweeney. (]i
G. Duncan Bellinger. ei
H. II. Jennings. tl
J. Harvey Wilson. n<
Robert J. Gantt.
W. J. Johnson.
Columbia. S. C.. Ferunry 19. 1904.
Having taken up the official duties
upon the commission at the expiration
of the term of the Hon. W. H.
Timmermun, my predecessor. I had
nothing to do with the election of the
architect, or the awarding of the con
tract, but as to ail the facts relating . 11
to the actions of the commission, and b
the opinions expressed tierein with ref- "
eren<to thns? facia, expr sseil in the j h
Hb iiliovi' lat'ff' 1 ' 1
* - vyw* % ? urn iu utility tiCCOl d M
#
v-f - ','v" Vj*-f
with the report of the commission, and
with the limitations above expressed 1
have signed myself us a responsible
member of the commission.
It. H. Jennings.
Under the resolution passed by the
general assembly of Souih Carolina,
allowing the members of the State
house commission to tile such statements
as they respectively desired to
make. 1 submit the following:
That in the election of architect to
tnake : luns and specifications for the
completion of the work on the State
house I did not vote for Mr. Mllburn
the acceptance for the completion Mellvaln-Unkefer
Co. was the only one
that came within the limits of the appropriation.
ami it resolved itself into
the acceptance of the same or a postponement
of the work until the provisions
should be made by the State
legislature. When 1 went out of office
as State treasurer my connection with
the commission ceased, and I am in no
way responsible for the completion or
acceptance of the work of the contractor.
I did not pretend to have any
knowledge of architecture, and could
therefore have . .sily been imposed
upon as to the beauty and the tinish of
the architecture.
Very 1 'pectfully submitted,
\V. H. Timmermun.
EXHIBIT A.
Personally appeared G. Duncan Bellinger.
who being duly sworn, says:
That in the late fall of the year 1W3.
upon casually meeting the Hon. J. O.
Patterson, a member of the joint investigating
committee, and ascertninng
accidentally from him that he had
just returned from Columbia where
He had been in attendance upon said
.-ommittee, 1 asked hint if the commission
would be accorded a hearing
Before his committee. In reply to this
Mr. Patterson stilted that Mr. Aldrich
was the chairman of the committee
ind advised me that if such request
was made of the chairman it would
)o granted. Deponent referred to reasons
mutually known to him and to
Vlr. Patterson why such request would
>e unpleasant to deponent, upon which
dr. Patteison assured ine that
ie would himself notify the chairnan
of the desire of the members of
he commission to be heard. This con- .
versation occurred in the town of
jarnwell on a Saturday night, within
10 feet of the paling of Mr. Patterson's
'ront yard.
Subsequently and before the occason
next to be referred to in the same
own. and near the -same locality, I
ocalied to Mr. Patterson our previous
onveisation and asked him if the
ight which we had demanded would
>e accorded to us. and lie assured me :
hiit it would, and that lie had spoken I
o the chairman on the subject and the'
irobabllity was that the Illness from
vhich Mr. Aldrich was then suffering
vus the reason why I, and other members
of the commission had not been
lotified. 1 again Impressed upon him
hat this request was made on behalf
if all of the members of the commisilon.
These are the occasions to which I ,
eferred in the communications which
recently published concerning this
equest made upon Mr. Patterson, and
it that time 1 had no reference to any
ther: but his published statement.
nairl tn liovn Kaa.-. < ? .l.vf.oio., .W KIo
..... .... ....... W.V... ... ... .....
onduct, while explaining upon the
loor of the house of representatives, j
he Injustice done by his committee
o members of our commission recalled
o me another and third occasion when
his demand for justice was repented,
n the city of Columbia, on the night
if the 17th of December, just passed.
?ne of my partners, the Hon. I.. \V.
duskell. who is a member of the house
?f representatives, and myself went by
ippointment to the Columbia hotel to
neet some clients from the city of
\ugustu. with whom we conferred until
about 12 o'clock. After this conference
and when about to leave the hotel
.ve met Mr. J. O. Patterson, who requested
us to (to to his room, as he
Aould have to sit up to catch a late;
train. While in this gentleman's room
lie subject of the investigHtiiiR com- i
nittee arose and 1 learned accidentally
hat n meeting of this committee had
jeen very recently held. Becoming j
hus convinced that the promised hear- j
ng was in a fair way never to he ac- I
:orded to us, I most earnestly attemp- !
ted to Impress him with the deterinin-'
ition on the part of some of us to
tppeal to the legislature were we so
infuirly treated as not t<> he accorded 1
in opportunity to be heard. Again I
eceived empty promises and vain asturances.
A very recent conversation
vith Mr. Haskell warrants nie in thej
assertion that he was present and re- ;
alls that the request was most enrn>stly
made
G. Duncan Bellinger.
Sworn to before me this. 18th day of
February, 1U04. J. T. Gantt,
Notary Public, S. C.
EXHIBIT R.
state of South Carolina?County of
Richland.
Personally appeared W. J. Johnson,
vho being duly sworn, says that durng
the present session of the leglslaure
the deponent liad an intimation
hat the commission for the compleion
of the State house were RoinR to
e seveic'.y eritieised by the committee
ppointed to investiRate the several
eports of the commission. That the
eponcnt immediately looked up ltepreentative
Rawlinson, who was a memer
of the investigating committee, and I
uformed hiin of what deponent had
eard, and further informed him that
f the reports of severe arraignment |
r criticism were true that the com- !
lisslon hu<l a right to be heard, and
hat an opportunity should be given |
hem. That Representative Rawlino?
assured deponent that there was'
othlng in the rumor and that the comlission
would not lje harshly criticis- :
il ami that liis committee had not
ally made up its report: that they
ould have another meeting tind all!
tie membera <>:' the old commission
auld be heard: further stilted that it
as his Impression that ail the memers
of the commission had been inited
to attend their meetings: deonont
inforntfd him that none of the
tent be i> ot the commission had been
tvited to an: of the meetings so far sis
eponent knew, certainly deponent
[111 not been.
\\\ J. Johnson.
Sworn to betore me tliis, 18th day of
'ehruary. I!?M.
Lewis W. Haskell,
Votary 1 hi bile for S. C.
KXHIBIT C.
tote of South Carolina?County of
"Richland.
Personally appeared before me 'A. H.
als. who being duly sworn, says:
hat lie is a reporter for The Daily
cord, si newspaper published at Conoid
: tlist t in company of Lewis
Obu. at that time reporter for The
otr* and Courier, he applied at tht
<rieultural committee ni.?r. la the
late house, where he heard the legistlve
committee Investigating tin
ork on the State house was in scson,
for permissi*wi to report the evience
and proceedings; tliat dcponit
was told by one of the members of
le committee that the meetings were
at public.
A. li. Seats.
Sworn to and subscribed before me,
lis l(lth day of February, 1!>04.
A. C. DoPass.
Xotarv Public.
KXHIBIT 7a
Lewis Wood, being July sworn,
i.vs: Tliat he went to the agricultnil
committee room where the invest!*
ating committee was in session, and
tquired if there was any news of the ;
lvestigntion to i.e published at that
inie, and llial lie was told by. a uiem- j
ber of the committee thut there was
none.
Lewis O. Wood. Jr..
The Stale.
| " I
Sworn to before me this 16th day of
February, laoi.
E7. O. DePass, (L. S.)
Notary Public for South Carolina.
Exhibit E.
State of South Carolina,
Itlchland county.
Personally appeared before me L). H.
Means, who bein>? duly sworn says
that he was summoned to produce certain
records of th< commission for the
completion of the Slut* house and to
testify before the "Joint committee <to
consider the several reports of the
commission on the completion of the
, StfltH hdlKM ntnl 4
| to." which committee vas meeting in
tiie agricultural committee room of
| the house. Thut he entered the room
and was about to be examined when
another witness was announced as
present whereupon deponent was informed
that he was excused until the
said committee had finished with said
other witness. That deponent tnen
withdrew and waited in another office
i in the State house until after the departure
of said other witness when
deponent was again summoned to appear
and testify. That during his examination
by said committee while deponent
was endeavoring to put in what
lie considered necessary or nroper qualifications
of "yes" and "no" answers
[ deponent was interrupted by the chairman
with the statements "answer the
question." and "you need not go in to
that at all."
Thut just after the examination was
completed the chairman of the committee
requested deponent to say noth,
ing of what hud transpired during his
examination by said committee.
That during deponent's examination
by said committee Senator J. Q. Marj
shall was present.
That some time subsequent to deponent's
examination by said joint committee
ex-Attorney General G. Duncan
Bellinger, handed to deponent a letter
written by said G. Duncan Bellinger
to ex-Gov. M. B. McSweeney. dated
Dec. 219(>3, of which the following
is a copy:
Columbia. S. Dec. 22. 1903.
lion. M. H. McSweenev, Hampton C.
H.. S I'
Dear Sir: 111 reply to your communication
I write to say that 1 recollect
than on May 31. 1902. when you were
governor and 1 attorney general of
Soutli Carolina. 1 received from you a I
letter of date May 31. 1902. a carbon*
copy of which is to be found at pages |
140 and 141 of volume of "Public I.and '
Better Book. New Series. No. 1 to 200," I
of which letter the following is a copy.
to wit:
"Columbia. S. C., May 31, 1902.
"Hon. G. Duncan Bellinger, Attorney
General, Columbia. S. ('.
"Dear Sir: You are familiar with the
action of the commission for the com- i
pletion of the State house at meeting(
May 23, 1902, to-wit: 'Resolved that it
appears to the commission for the completion
of the State house, that the
work is satisfactory and that the contract
has been substantially performed."
The above resolution was upon
the question as to whether McllvalnUnkefer
company has performed their
contracts for the completion of the
State house, anil subsequently the commission
ordered the balance due Mcll
.... . 1...1- ...i.i
contracts to be paid. Mollvaln-Unkefer
company now desire that the surety
bowl lor $50.0(tn given by thctn to
the commission for the faithful performance
of their said contract be by
me surrendered to them the said contractors.
No action was by said commission
talcen authorizing or directing
the surrender <>f said surety bond. Is
such action necessary or am 1 authorized,
upon the action ulready taken by
the commission to endorse uimn said
surety bond the resolution of commission
as to contractors' compliance
with, or performance of (.ontract, and |
surrender said surety bond to the said
i contractors?
"Kindly give me your ofiicinl opinion
upon this matter and oblige,
"llespectfully.
"M. H. MeSweeney.
"Governor and Chairman."
"P. S.?Mr. I'nkefer informs me
that until surrendered his surety bond
is costing him $25.00 per month."
j Upon receipt of this letter from you
1 recollect that.i gave you orally my
ofacial opinion, as attorney generai,
that as said action of said commission
was final and conclusive as to said contractors
having performed their contract
(to secure the performance of
which said surety bond had been given
to you as chairman of said commission).
said contractors were entitled to
the return of the bond: and further
action by the commission being unnecessary.
I advised you to surrender
said bond to the contractors with an
endorsement thereon signed by you
which I dictated.
Very respectfully.
G. Duncan Bellinger.
That at the request of said ex-Governor
Al. B. MeSweeney deponent pasted
the original of the foregoing letter,
written by ex-Attorney General O
Duncan Bellinger to ex-Governor M.
IJ. MeSweeney. in the back of the minute
book of the commission for the
completion of the State house, so as to
preserve in writing the evidence of the
reasons and circumstances under
which said M. IS. MeSweeney while
governor surrendered said bond to said
contractors, Mcllvain, I'nkefer Co.
That subsequent to deponent's said
examination the secretary or stenographer
of said committee requested deponent
to give him access to the rec- 1
uiub ui mi' commission, lor me completion
of the State house, for the uurpose
of said secretary's comparing and
verifying with said original records
said secretary's copies of portions
thereof, to be used in said joint committee
report. That at this lime deponent
called the attention of said clerk
or stenographer to said original letter '
from ex-Attorney-General Bellinger to |
ex-Governor M. H. MeSweeney, pasted '
as before Stated, in the back of said j '
minuie book. ?nd requested said clerk i !
of said committee to take a copy of said (
letter and show it to the chairman
of said joint committee, thinking that
said chairman might desire to use said 1
letter, as it contained a statement by
ex-Attorney General Bellinger of important
facts in reference to the sur- I
render of the said bonds to the said j 1
contractors to M. B. McSwecnoy, upon
which matter deponent had been examined.
That said se< retary or stenographer '
of said joint committee did make and
take with him a copy of said letter, '
which letter did not appear in said
joint committee s- report to the legislature
I?. H. Means.
Sworn to before me this 16th day of
February, 1001.
l.ewis \V. Haskell.
Notary Public for South Carolina.
FX HI BIT F. '
Stat'1 of South Carolina?t'ountv of
Richland. i
Fetsors'ij flppeured before nie, Joe
B. Gaifunbel, whti, being Ui?'v swoan,
says that he was summoned ,ts a witness
bv the committee Investigating
the work upon the State house, and
that when ho appeared and gave his
testimony Senator J. Q. Marshall was
present in the room. Deponent further
swear:- that he wa present in the
State house when the eontr.n t for the
work on the State house was let, and
knows that it u.ts the general tinder-M
standing among tho bidders that the
junk removed, from the building in I
doing tlie wotk provided in the plans
and specifications of Frank P. Milburn
would go to the contractors; deponent
Is peculiarly >iualified to know this
fact because he wished to buy this'
junk, and talked about it to every one
of the bidders whom he met.
Deponent further swears that priori
to the letting of the contract for the
work he had Hied with the rommlsslu,
I j?n application to buy the salo junl
but was informed that he must appl
to the contractors for the purchase o
j same. That Mr. Unkefer told tit
i deponent two or three days after til
i contract was awarded that the com
mission had referred to him the appli
cation deponent had made to buy th
junk.
Deponent further swears that he is i
denier in, and familiar with the marke
value of old U'on and other junk, am
that he made an estimate of and or
fered the highest market price for th
old iron it was necessary to remove ii
placing the dome on the building; tha
he regarded the said old iron worth
j less for any other purpose than Junl
l and had he secured same he wouli
have Immediately shipped it off a
such: that the contractors secured :
higher price from other parties for ;
portion of tills old iron than depouen
would have paifl for it.
Deponent further swears that he ex
a^nined the ceiling removed from tin
main lohby of the State house, while
it remained on the State housi
grounds; that said ceiling was galva
nlzed iron, and worthless, even as junk
that the contractors gave it to the de
ponent, hut he would not haul it otY
and in turn gave it to the asylum foi
the insane.
That he did not testify to the fact!
above when being examined before tin
Investigating committee because th<
questions were not asked him.
J. B. Garfunkel.
Sworn to before me this 15th day oi
February. 1904. D. \Y. McLaurin.
Notary Public.
EXHI It IT G.
Richmond, Ya.. Feb. 4. 1904.
Robert J. Gantt, Capitol Building:
In tny capitol bid I figured on sell old
material being mv property.
\V. A. Chesterman.
Savannah, tia.. Feb. 19,1901.
Robt. J. Gantt:
In making up bid for contract on
capitol there, contractor was to have
all old stone, iron and other material
on the premises.
J. E. Burgess.
(Of Stewart Contracting Company.)
EXHIBIT H.
REQUEST FOR OPINION.
Newberry. S. Aug. 9, 1901.
Hon. (?. Duncan Bellinger, Attorney
General, Columbia, S. C.:
Dear Sir: Pursuant to the permission
of the commission charged with
the completion of the State house, I
have the honor of asking your opinion
upon a question which has arisen about
the ownership of the old material.
The facts appear in the paper herewith
submitted, and the contrnets and
the sped flea tie .
The papers submitted consist o! a
partial draft of a report of the committee
and si copy ot the letter from
the architect.
The minutes referred to coi ;n? Gv*
statement of Mr. Utikefer, one
contractors.
The committee desires your opinion
under the terms of the ?on tract and
the circumstances of the case upon : he
question where the ownership of tinold
material rests, whether in the contractors
or the State.
Awaiting your reply, I am.
Very truly yours,
Geo. S. Mower. Chairman.
ATTORNEY GENKKAl.S OPINION.
Pvoi'lllivn n.mnrlnu.i>! full.? ..r O...
Attorney General.
Columbia. t?. C., \uk. 2t>. 1'JOl.
Hon. (t?o. ft. Mower, Chairman. etc.,
Newberry, S. c.
Dea*- Sir: I have before me your l?tter
relating to the (|UesiioM of the ownership
of what is known as the "old
material" in connection with the contract
for the completion ot the Slate
house.
1 note that you say that the committee
<1 ok ires my "opinion under the
terms of the contract and the circumstances
of the case upon the
question where the ownership of the
old material rests, whether in the contractors
or the Stntq."
1 have the honor to reply as follows:
As 1 gather thorn the admitted facts
are:
The only pertinent reference in the
THE ANSWER OF ARCHI
In Detail the Man Against
Kcplies to His Acc
Assc
REPLY <?F FRANK I'. MILRERN,
ARCHlTKt .'T, TO RF.POKT OF IXYKSTli
J ATI NO COMMITTEE, RELATING
To THE WORK ON THE
STATE HOL'SK.
To the Public
I will be Rl.nl foi you to consider my
rcj>l> to so much of the report of the
investigating committee. recently m obto
the legislature, as seems necessary
at this time.
In the first plr.ee, the committee,
composed of chos- n representatives of
the people, "all honorable gentlemen,"
in their -lesire to vindicate the author
of the minority report of one member
of the old capitol commission, have
gone beyond the authority given by the
concurrent resolution under which they
acted. Ity that resolution they wore
directed to report to the next session
of the general assembly "such facts and
l'ei tiniiih-!hl:it iu'ig in vt f? t . m ?? ? ihot n!t?
us tliey may deem advisable." And
yet these "honorable gentlemen" ro
out ?>f thefar way to inject into their
report wholly unwarranted and improper
conclusions, which are neither
"facts" nor "recommendations," but
libellous and indiscriminate reflections
on numerous State officers and representatives.
as w.-ll as the architect and
contractors. "Mife-rnhle fraud," "nton
strous swindle" and "malefactors!"
Such gratuitous expressions are asfalse
as tin y are uncalled for by the
concurrent resolution.
Hut, that this committee v is more
bent on vindicating the on<- dissenting
member of the capitol commk-sion than
carrying out the suggestions .,f tl?o
legislature, is evidenced by the fact
that the.s ilid not "employ an .architect."
as v, as stigR. sled l?y the authority
Riwn in in in tent resolution,
but paid Jifi.itO a day for a "contractor,"
who says he has been "superintendent
of constructing of the l nited
States capitol for font yea-s."
Hut further still, this committee was
directed to consider the "several reports
ot the commission for the <011pletion
of the State house," with nutboj'ity
to summon witnesses, eie.
They seem t<. have considere 1 o.ti> the
One minority report of Sen tor .1.
Marshall, made in l-V.truary, l!'en, end
examined witnesses only in support of
that minority report, without calling
a single witness In support of the report
and is .urn of seven honored citizens
and olficeis of the State, who differed
with .'el. Mej lu.ll, and v.ho m
a? wide av.ak o the interc.-ts of tieState
as he or ...t* n,..nb<Ts "f this investigating
committee, and who have
always depended more upon v itni -s
in this Stale. whose standing and credibility
are known to th'-jn i r.-onally.
than a foreign importation who nroconimended
i>y the superintendent of
tlio federal capitol building, and was no
doubt revet- hefon heard of in South
Carolina.
Hut lei us glance :il i lie procedure of
tins ini -1 igating committee. When
they select their expert he is brought
to Columbia and shown the g noral
plans <iiul specifications upon which
contractors were Invited to bid for the
work; but rot th<* plans showing th<modifications
not th<- ihMall drawings
tor actual work. He examines the
n plant1, specifications ?>i \\ i ltten contract '
c, of the use <>t ounvmhtp of the "old ma- i t
y terlal*' In mu st ion Is to be found 111 I
f the specifications, in the following j i
e words: "The successful contractor will j i
e be permitted to use ull old material
- that is now on the g round, and such i
i purts of the present roof that conform j t
e to ttiese plans and specifications: but it t
lis understood that the marble now on!'
a the grounds is not included. This only 1
t covets the granite columns, balusters. 1
J | old iron, bracing, granite, etc.. in the I
- , roof that is suitable, and the proper t
e size that is called for. If in doubt con- !
it stilt the architect on tills subject be- I
t fore making a bid." j1
2. Itefcre bidding on the work Me- ! i
t Ilvuin-l'nkef"!' company, as well us <
I other cmnp litlve contractors, called I
S liniin ttn> -i.- liii ? i c n 'fi'<
! ?. - - >. . I . .IHIIJUI II, l?H"
i an interpretation of the clause quoted. i
' concerning which tiny were in doubt. '
tj 3. The architect informed the eon- <
j tmeters "that the contractors bidding I
- for the work would get sueh 'old ma- '
? j teriul,' and would be permitted to use i
? sueh old parts jis would conform with 1
? the new plans and specifications." i v
* . (See Mllburn's letter. July 31. 1901.) j i1
4. Acting upon tite interpretation t
' driven l?y the nrehiteet. Mcllvain-Unke- *
. fer eonipnny. after making utlowauces >
f for what was eoneeived to lie the <
i value of the "old material" to them, I
' put in their bid for the contract, and
' was duly Jieeeptod by tile commission. f;
? f?. One Mj'. Oaifunkel. a junk dealer. I
; submit t< to the commission a proposi- f
tiop to buy the copper and old iron |'
i then in the old roof, and the coinmis- i
f sion. upon jK-eeptlntr Mdlvaln-Unkcfer s
| eompany's bid, ordered that the coinniunieation
of Mr. tlarfuttkel be tutned t
; over to the successful bidding con- j t
J tractor, upon the ground that the said | a
'old nutterial" \\ is ;tt tlto disposal of
' the laiti'f. i ?
I The clause quoted for the specifics- '
tions boars internal evidence of con- s
siious ambiguity. ami the conflicting c
:interest Is susceptible of various ini
tevpretatlons. It is easy to conceive 1
''that the bidding contractors could f
' claim with a show of rcjtson. tfie title t
to ihe "old material" in question, ami ' r
1 inasmui li as the pttper containing the '
! i latisc was prepared for and ill behalf I
of the eonimission. and tlie law would, ti
jis 1 understand it. construe the con- '
tract strictly against the enmiiiisvloti g
and in favor of the bidder, for one rca- 11
son. among others, that in cjises of s
doulit. Hie const! notion by the con- d
tractor's must be given the benefit of ?'
tie- doubt, iiuistnui'h as the comtnis- '
op th" j'ltthor ol lite sp.ecitha- tt
tiops in.. tie r. if either party must, v
on ac.o i,i i.t aniblguity.
Hut 1 iliink tliat up ton very recent \
date it had been tin* understanding on
jail sides il-at the contractors should be "
tlie owners of tlie old material, jind "
the facts as found seetn to t: to preelude
any other conclusion.
Tin statement of Milbtrrn. the archi- ,,
tect. speaking on lichait of the eonimls- t
sion. tlie known conditet of the con;
to. . liased upon Mllburn's Inter- 1
lprotatb.il. the aceeptunce of the bid ,.
based Upeti tlie supposed ownership by t
the contractors of tlie "old inateilal." ,,
and the declination to treat with a pro- J
; posed purchaser for th> sale ot the old
iiinicrmt, m?xi me reteirnce ot his bid ,t
to Me I Iv itn-l*nk"fer < n: 11i.i ny, it 11
: stop tlx- commission fiotii claiming
the "old material" In queatlon.
Hop!nij th.it this will tiif -t with yum ,,
approval. I tiro
V.-vy truly yours.
(SI-it. ili <*,. lime.in Tfellinirer,
A t tot tx v ?leneral. ,.(
Upon motion of Mr. Mower the Opln- M
ion o. t'-. ! tto:n<v oral ?:is ap- ,j
proved by vox < i vooo Mi. 4
Marshall \ * .1 it
i:\n ir:<T 1. p
< . I ; II .. S. < . F< h. 15.1'.*04.
This cortitb < that it tl. fall of 11*01 'i
I hou. ht from .J. It. ?JurfunUol, for the f<
use of the State hospital for the insane,, tl
1 for the aitinunl of Jt'.xo 11 !< : of gal- It
; vanh'.ed iron railing ;:n?l tiiat he T
throw In .is worthies- a lot of metal f<
j o iling. wlix-li he said \ might have ?
! for battling off. Tlx c<jihig Is now ly- o
inn in a rubbish heap In the hack yard
: of the hospital. a
I \V. l'.ahcock.
r
TECT FRANK P. B1LB0RN. I
Whom Charges Were Made !<
\
:users in the General
mbly. in
I building in the 1 in lit of these original, it
i general plaits and specifications,
i And \?t no one of tlx- seven gentlei
men of the capital eotnmission, who fi
I honestly differed with < 'ol. Marshall, h
was called, nor was I asked to show ti
! hint the modified an ! complete speci- h
| Mentions and detail drawings under v
I who'ii the work v..1 done. 1
j it appeal s that on .1 I'i x.y In .May, <1
1 I'.'o;:. before this inv tir itiag commit- tl
j tee was to take testimony, is retneni- I'
I hered by tlx- . h iiiman, tl.. chairman <"
j of tlx < uomitlt called at t ,v ottlee. J'
i i,:?-ing 111 \ ahsi .i' * if' 11 tlie < itand n
1 left ,1 verbal message with one of ni> !
I dram.ht.smen about the meeting. at
which th' evpi- t fioin W r s h 1 a a t?x:
I would giv his testimony, and lha' I !
j could he pro r: t. is- semi any com- f
I imniicatIon If 1 desii-d. lint 1 never u
j received tlx tin and, in fad. w
never lx nr : et tlx- i . :t|? t until last n
Friday, the i^th inst. In this contco- tl
tlon I be;; to lllmiit the fidlowitig C
statement - 0
"To Whom it May < .x'?rn. b
'This is to eeiilfy that I am in the n
employment of Frank 1*. Milburn, at chiteet,
ill tile capacity ot eligitx . and tl
, u a ii-. ut xu, it, mi was (lining mo ;asi 11
yi'jil. fi
"That om. when Mr. Milhurn and tMr.
lliistor were nut ??t" tin- It
oltieo, ,\h. Milhurn hi-mn nut <u tin* "
city, a i ntl< in.in i ;iI! - !. and r?Mitv- h
ssMi'.iua , ; .is. ii i?. ;1 tniMithi't' of 8<
tin* Slati* i)'>ii.-i' iiiNi-i titratiiu; eoimnit- tl
I st >ti-i 111 oh tat i ...t said ii a 11 In 11 - a
i w'nu! 1 I tl.v t I understood, tin- It
i \t i| iy) li.it. i s inn. and ! . !. I I'
that ! Ii-t .Mi. Miilmin know, ami also -<
!* t word t I!\ iln. Fnketer com- n
(in. I ! "i.i -lit ! t Mr. .Milhuni l!
[ kiinw, and :Imi Mi 11\ i: ., Fnkofcr run- 'I
I'ltny it' v\ i* mil,l ti.a: l lhnuylit we 1'
had t). ir add! - Ml I.hi* ?>!.: 0. ti
'j'l. i a ".ii itii k iiuii i.; Mr. Hi'istor, "
who i- i lui-l draughts a an and n.ssds't- a
ant I" M vlilt.in , I told him of v. hat I'
I... I tak"ii pin. . i. i s> ;>|hi - ,i Ii would 1
tmiiimiiiii.it v. ah 11 .< in. hut I never
nnntioii' l i - i iit.-i i?i Mr Milhurn *
until I'ti 1 li'iii. n
"(Sinn?Ml> "(' ' ! '. Kepler," h
"Ti' V !?' Ill Mat I 'nil . Ii :
"i he: ii\ i 11.. v ti, t i atn now. '
and wa la-' \ ' r i . f dt au^htsmnti "
aiid ..., ! ai i u > Fiaui- lv Milhurn.
an hi i.
"Tha'i I ti ga..d I: i ui-ia.inn oi l"- !
tiilcntn in \;i ii n- F. ph i . but
!ha V* r.n i. : i . i hearinv of ,
id. a< . ion 11. ai rep red 1 o,
biTori i' t:> ?. I:' Mr. Kepler Is
? i.i i i-rii'iii of Miiiinft tlie
sit. 'h'l' ! ir 1 dji' i >1 I ike it in sutli
ntly i > I., v" .a ly i in?l, and 1 am ti'
sui '- * 1 iii I ,i *v. ,i) :iiinned tho mut- ((
tor In ,\ir. Millmrn.
(Si i > "Jin tin'l Mf i- t-i ' ,
VI tor ih. l-t'.'irilit?. .ii wliii'h iy now )>
appears 1 li;H . vi i.il witnc:-.?es werOox- w
iiininod, I loomed of it from the news- p
paper;- and iotnmon rumor; but i.ewr i
know : ivi'.in. of tPo airport r-1 the i,
t? . Union;. Million rh I heard that Col.
I M.*t; j-li.i il vor i>r<-y.?nl. itiul that the i
: : Moli.y were behind i'|i.-oil doer- I'll- n.
til my rot iin io 111i-- riiy last Friday, a
when T i.oi hold of ? .op" of tho report w
the ..ii,iii i ioo havlnR i'o\i-r honored'*)
mo vvuh ."p.' I neve; Know .nilliorl- u
talivcly oi. the lelleetiuas ou iliu w oiU.1
%
After kevplng the testimony, and
their proceedings secret, an 1 believe,
from May to December, more thun six
months. I received a note from the
secretary of the committee, dated
Barnwell. S. Dec. 7, 11)03, but mailed
n Columbia. 11th December, giving me
in opportunity to appvur before the
'omiTilttee, if 1 desireu. Having heard
>f the proceedings in May. ut which 1
)vas told, and believed. Col. Marshall
lad been present, I decided, without
luvlim ooinist'l l li-i.i
tppear unless the committee desired my
nesenee, 1 hud been guilty of ubsolutey
no wrong. or conscious neglect of
my duty to the State, but had given
ny best efforts to assist the capitol
ommlssion in the discharge of Its doles
und the proper expenditure of the
hate's money, hence 1 had nothing to
'Xpl.-iin away. Hut knowing that I had
nodifled and detailed drawings in my
(dice not on file in the State house,
offered to place my office records at
ire disposal of tin- committee, in this
onnection I see that my note to the
ommitlee has been termed "curt." 1
vish u> disclaim any such intention;
mo If it is, I ior;ret it. and plead In oxenuation
tin- fact tiiat I began the
druggie for bread early in life, and had
rot the opportunities of collegiate edu atlmi
enjoyed by some members of the
nvestigating committee.
Hut iu justice to the capitol cotnmlsilon,
wntch with one exception apiroved
my work, as well as to myself
md family, l wish to say something in
cgnrd to the specific findings of the
nvestigatiiig committee, in the order
itnted.
First. As to the charge that
he plans and specifications filed with
he secretary of state were not suitable
md complete.
i believe this was the first objection
node by Col. Marshall after my elcclon
as architect, ami was fully conidered
and pass? d upon bv the capitol
ommis.sion in tiic year 1MM). Mr. Alarhall
alone dissenting. At that time
he commission had before it letters
roni four ci the most prominent contactors
ami builders of this section
d the country, who. after *studying
hose plans carefully to base upon,
hem bills for a very large sum of
noney, secured by a heavy bond, had
iid upon this work. Some of these
eiitlemcn were personally known to
iifinhcrs of the ciii'iinissiun, and their
tatements were to the effect that the
rowings and specifications were plnln
trough to nuike an intelligent bid. that
lie plans and specifications were fully
mderstood. and wore proper for good
rork. The opinion of such well known
infractors and builders as iJudc ?V
Valker, J. \V. Bishop & Co., W. A.
'hesterman and Nicholas lftn'*r. comlonly
known as "Honest Nick." must
uiwiigh tlii opinion of \ir. Marshall
nd the Washington "expert" with any
.iparii.it judge.
Second. That ili<? contract tlxed the
Id work on lis completed portion of
li" building as the standard.
This is not true. There Is nothing In
lie plans und specifications which
miiu i>?* so nin'inii'u i'xi'i'|n. peiiutps,
lie word "prototype." on one of the
cni'inl drawings, and this was Intend>1
to apply only to style. ouiline, innn,
linpe. and was not intciidod apply
> the classification of the workinftnliip.
I'lidei each ot the headhunt of
tie various classes of work the same
as fully outlined. civil g the numhet
f cuts to the Inch for tin different
arts of the \voi k.
In this connei'tion. 1 may say that
was tint intended to make the stone
ornloe In one piece, tor instance. The
mall appropriation for the whole work
eeessiiated (treat economy, and
ie scale detail drawings how that It
as to he built up of several memtieri,
s it was done, Instead of the n ??re exensive
one-piece cornice.
Kcferring to sheet ti of the general
rowings where the note before re rrcd
to is found, it will be seen that
he work is to he the same only when
has its prototype in the <jid building^;
'hai it does not tie an that tie* cornice,
ir Instance. Is to be identical with ill"
i 1 work, you have only to see sheet 7
f those same drawings, where the
ornice is distinctly shown to he built
p ot !? \oral pieces.
Third. That th State at a great excuse.
in the neighborhood of Jlfi.OOO,
ad a splendid st'-d coiling in the main
>bhy, which the ' out r.ftoi > took
! 1 converted to tin ir own use. wht.-rey
the St.ate lo t in the neighborhood
i
The plans and specifications required
he . oiitrt tors to cut a circular openly.
into tin- ceiling foi th - hind dome.
Vhen tin- toiling was cut. ami ii was
l.orougiily examined, it was found to
e galvanized iron, in n had condition
ltd dif.n ult to work into shape, eseeially
.as it eontnii ed ceiling lights
0 longer of use. The contractors sa: I
would require special workmen and
onsldetahle loss ol" liiuo to pttell il
p. and would not then he as ? itis!i<
lorv as a new et iling. which ould
e gotten ill less tittle, ninl en: hie them
1 lie ready for the meeting of tin
gislature, although the new ceiling
ould cost th'-ni more. Alter fit*' in-;
estimation of all the facts and cotillions.
1 decided that it w. s te
lie Intel. St of tl St it" to a . ?. hi
ropi ed change, altd 1 a pj.ro,
iling thev used. whl h hai ....
e. feet'y with the design of th
ig under the balcony around the it ain
I by. which was placed there mulct
li >.* i -v s.-e's : tipei vise n. As hot h
edings are in il. j-.inie lol.hy md :ue
ecu at the same time, harmony is esemi:'
. Neither th" cornice n- cove'
moldings in th. s |obh> were interfered
..ill, but the new coiling was used only
i th* ilcld or hotly of the celling'
hi rough which the dome is cut. The
onirai tors thought they ought to have
xtra for this new celling, hut 1 would
ot allow it. ami the Stale got the
ew ceilings without cost.
This item shows the fearful mistake I
lie investigating committee math in
t examining farther into the real
ids instead of giving so much weight
> that minority report. They woul 1
live lie pi,111. liclleve that it was a
steel ceiling," costing in the neighbor-'
.1.,.I or *la 11.111 iclir.i, , li.. i.. .1. .
pcrotary ol state's oHh ? show that all
ceilings .in<l cornices. si el Iicmui. ..
ixl skylights i. the rotunda. <>: main
ilby, all I tile <-i-.lillH n\ ! the senate
ilihy together. > st 4>m1.\ <7.f'.<N. oil tin?
t at" May. l.vMi. Any well informed
inn will know tlir.t the cornice actual'*ost
tun h more than the ceiling
'ho public must in charity 5 at this
lumicr ?> ' the roritniittc" dnwn ?
gleet niul it,iioruni > . or convi. t them
1 deli: mi!' rrilsi .-a tit : tion in
taking tie tatcii.i-nt i he "oil thai
Oil] til" Ft' ' lost i tit l|o|j?hliOVo'iiI
of ? 1
I. t th' piihlit KUi-j Iiv Mr. 11 tin t
liv.uircd th1 i.ii a tliat tt.c eoi tractors
i >VCi| c 11i 1: . h t t h<'.V In: lit
inlets Co n support the dome! Tin
let IS. the o ll' :iv> eel I" Ilns .ill'l
irdel- v. 1 rais 1 fioni I110 outaldo
ill, iind not through the main lobby.
I hit not content wi:h try in. ; to nroir
indignation ovei th'' allege i losI
the state, ill. v itoniiit to in.lttt'
liaiaote: by chyrgitig that ' ihe eon
nd ' in rt ' 1 1 the1 own use th
111 ill.1 .11:1 lit MliifUl | 'I of Ill' ?>'. i
uildit Tin 1 . I f.. i", .nd th(i
irlit : ku> " . oi nil !'. . l? 1 no.|
y reasi'iinlilo. fair 1 in I impartial in
uiry. tha 1 11.. - ? !?! d : tg 11> 1 w ,i:
line d from the I'o ' I" ! oby wa.o,
or s.i|. nt t.s. 1 I > '1 >r ' tor
lit \>ii ;?i.en to Mi. 1 hitrunke* .1 la
oid I 1 -nio . ;i 11 ,iu the groundnd
he in turn k It t > Dr. I: beo< :
II the same 1 on, end till ' "valibie
and lieaui : 11J thi "splendid
eel oiling." now !i. - in a rubbish
enp in tla* lie I. ,\ ti'l of lie St;.to lu
iti" . ;>!uiii, m sib nt but uniinpoach
I do witless of the outing'.iti- llhol .
hirii this iiivest'antliiK committor has
.mil or..... 1?.? .-. ... -? !.? 1
Iff*.
jj'ourtii, 'Inai by ilio omission ol i\\ o4
"9
I Inner columns from the front portico
the contractors made a prollt of $3,400.
and the estimated loss to the State is
*4.;"oO.
That the public; may fully understand
this matter, I wish to call attention to
the fact, that when called to this work.
I found a partially completed building,
much valuable stone and marble on
hand, and an appropriation wholly ami
| admittedly iusulllcient to complete thebuilding
as originally designed. When
I made the plans, it was to utilize all
the very expensive columns then lying
on the ground, and considered tit for
use. that largely induced me to pro
> ivit- i"i i 1iu iiiiici voummrs im me nvill
1 port ho. It turned out with this work,
a.s is generally the cuse in remodeling
I old, or partially completed building:*,
that many modiflcatiotis and changes
because necessary, :^nd were made with
i the consent and approval of the commission.
as a rule Col. Marshall being
the only one dissenting. In hoisting
there massive columns into position,
one of them broke by Its own weight
when being removed from Its position
I on the ground. An examination settled
beyond question that there was a.
defect in tire stone, which then showed
an old crack about two thirds of the
way through. It was generally belleved
and conceded that the loss fell
upon the State. The matter was
promptly reported. 1 was of the opluI
ion. ati l inn still, that it was then best
, to omit tire two inner columns, because
there would be more tloor space, because
tire architectural features would
be just as good, because with slight
changes (omitting a wood truss and
substituting steel trussed perllns) the
strength of tin* structure would not
be impaired in the least; because it
would save much time in completing
the work, and because it would save
rather than eost the Stale anything.
The contractors offered to furnish
| new eolunni for ?'.')00, necessitating
! several months' delay; or. piece the?
broken column for $.">00. causing a delay
of one month, or change the plan?-*
and omit th< two columns,, causing no
I delay, and deduct from the contract
price * '>(?(). which it w:.s shown by im
itemized statement would be saved to
the contractors by the change. Witl.
all this information before the com
mission, after full consideration. It derided.
l?y a vote of r> to 3, to change
the original ]ilan and omit the two
I coluenis. tints saving; to lite State $600.
without detriment to the w >rk. and
giving thes columns to the State lor
monumental purposes.
Mr. limit talks about "the stone lintel
an ! brlek work on top of these columns."
Tlie specifications never called
for any such tiling. And yet this willing
wityess. uti".hie to condemn the
'.illicit 'icy of t iie "bracing and anchoring."
goes out of his way to .suggest
careless; a In "a great portion of the
construct ion throughout tills building."
Again, this "government" witness*
says tie two massive square pillars,
under the portico, "now perforin no
duty at all." Any sane person can s o
for hint, "it that ilcse tiers, originally
constructed principally to support the
two i ner columns, since tin cluing*
support much of the portico. And it
was to get such a witness that the investigating
committee passed over so
nmn\ : nth i n architects and contrnc*
-us of known ability and intcgt
i l y.
Fifth. That the new leaf work on
tlie capitals is not as tine as the old.
It being inipt net ica l.ile to get tinstone
fop this new work from the old
quarry, a stone was selected which
niati bed it exactly, and the same accepted
with the hi i of tiie contractors,
the only slight difference, and which
is not npprt iable, in the work on the
capita!:', is due to tile fact that the
i'acolet granite is a trltle softer atu*
therefor.- i..it suceptibie to 'inite no
high a ilnfsli.
Sixth. 'I'hat lintel stones should extend
i cm columns at the rear of tlie
portico to corresponding front columns.
Where tlH-i * a-P)- .sJiu?-UliartW>UX"S
?d to resemble gt tiite.
That is inst a< < i.riling to the plans
and t- cifh' itluns. first-class galvanized
iron being used, which was as
good as could be afforded with tiie np;
j <>|.i ,a iion. and anfweis every purpose.
In reference to the glass floor which
leak- i.i rainy weather, 1 bog to say it
i. .i. .*..i i ?
for: i > gi\** .-ill iho light possible to
tiro ode,s aid |i:is'.ip'\vays helow. 1
selected this j i vie of floor iight, which
Ib sultnl le for the jilace. Unfortunately
there is hni little full, and yet I gave i
it 'I l pes. inly ontihl to connect with
t g mite work and the height of th<si'cond
iloor doorway entering the lolihy.
Tnis is no fault of mine;
it is one of the troubles encountered
in remodeling or adding to
a Iniilo *.:. The chiof trouble, however.
with the portico door is that
to imuobat.* the legislature, it was
laid just before the in. .-ting of that
1 > -I \m?s w iked on and abused
bofoi tin- , . . I.- and cement inateti.
( suth ieiitly. The natural c??n* *.
it* > e .v;e trial il was daning-d and
l- a bad apnea ranee. At.
1 . i it m < t the r? ar portico floor.
h It was n?.- i. used mil abused. will
sub* tiit.* i bis t oim .it ;<*n.
A ?o thi e> d'rig of the portico, I do
not know of ; if mat. .-;ai more snit:
lie for loll e* bing*. I IS Iliad" from
i la v ' - oi Ki.it <*ri:?! that w as
r< at. .1 by the e. ..It let'us from the
in i !*.l.i.v . hollgh not ill same lies'.;n
| won ! :* if tl." gentlemen of the
in 11i i omniiitce i now that th"
portleo * .r i:i the main etiiraftce
to i I ited Si* lis c.mi'ol at Washington
v* eotnnion pl:e goring, ami
that 'kft from the roof caused some
of it to fall
Seventh."That the roof is a "tar and
gi vol roiif. uiftiitihl *. ami leaks
bad!\ .
I i not :: tar a*al glove) roof, bill
is of the very latest quality of asphalt
and i rush- 1 q inrtz. and there is no
doubt about it r nswering ' l e purpose'
for at b ust t* :. yeais. as 111" roof contra
'or.- gov, . gasai.int. lor len years
against 1 ik* a.d iimb-rial w o and
' .il. This same lav- <>i rooting is on
lb-* .bowing 1 ?iiit iti ;-*. in the eity of
\\ a hill le 1 I. <
M; I lie ?V a t 1 iiie office building,
So ; h. in : iii ay ollii < building, I ov a
del : ! i. lions.*, I! .lei ;ii hotel. Itlis**
depart iiieiit lions.*. I'm: <1 Slab's (Vti
-ii:- nilli'illl" K' "I iliU'IH pl'llll II1K
ll"?s. ' ,1 II5.I1I* tin ts too 1111111"! II1IH
t.i I' 'ItiOli
!t . .1 ntiitt- r mi p . 'mind rogrct to
nt" th.it fool l. ,'ks. I have done
I'Vfi. th tiv ill ni> |i<i\\ * t; lit tin- first
to rent" !> it. It is ,i will known f id
Hint niiii'h 11?i'j'* i '. |it-i- i\" tools tli.'tn
'hi h.iV" proved it -ii i' ' n i im v. Th"
,m niin iit postotih e nt Savannah,
v iiii'h I. tih ml copper i-M.if l)-.'tU"i|
hadly. Tin- I'tiii I States pot-iotl!"" nt
ill. 11 III, will ll Is.I h is .III "\p- usiviri.
!"liked f> r \ . it--.
I i this i nniic .ii. I snhmii th" foilow
ing:
< '"hin <ia. S. t.I.in 1't, J'.iOl.
Mi !'t. nh I'. Mi'hurn, Architect, ?
unihin. s. t
I i if Sir 1C? f- -ring I" our c<>nv"r tioii
in regard to th" St.it" house,
"ill .'..iv th.it short lint, after tti.
hoiu work tvim finished th"
' 'i 11. I loof : .1 Invi u "oni|? ; 11 y
tuiiiphi d til" to go th> to and exntn
' !'. toof unil make the f in" f;h ist;o
ry If I "ould. I went on top of tin*
ul tilt' and w s somewhat surpi ised
i Hi i hi ' soni" ?'?!< liad torn the
t! i ai': Inn nt I jil.n'Os 1 "twcotl
i' >ii.'in ami (In- has of tlit; dome
I'm- . v?:al '"'I. iillnviiu; the water
tli wiii.: ?i' i tl .- dome niid tin* tmsn
in . !.i\.n mo i!;o rotunda below.
1 ir> wi W '!l fl *ho | fur'UIid till*
. n 1 nier li shim: wns put
i ' : at twit la It v y i >si
a it.-11 \ i.l r-n . viz. !i\ putting the flashait.
into the joint and turnine it up,
out by rut tins in the joint and > *tending1
the tin baric tnt" the joints
nnd bolting it with rods, nuts and
wa.dn;rs, nnd it w-m Impossible for it
to j;et oui unless some oue hud vori)