THE NEW STATE HOUSE.
The special order was called up [Mr. McMullen in the Chair] being bill [H. R. 466] supplemental to an act to authorize and provide for the erection of a new State House and for matters incident thereto.
The question recurred on the amendment offered by Mr. McCormick striking out all after the page: 283[View Page 283] enacting clause and inserting new matter in lieu thereof.
Mr. HEFFREN hoped that the amendment should not prevail for the reason that there is nothing in it farther than to strike out all after the reacting clause and insert entire new matter. There is nothing in the proposition to provide tor the continuance of these bonds given by the old State House Commissioners. He believed the State should get through this matter and keep within the $2,000,000, and according to the evidence before the Committee he believed that it coul4 be built with that amount. He was of the opinion that no public building in the United States was ever constructed with more economy and better management than has this building so far as the work had progressed, and if constructed within the $2,000,000 it will be the cheapest public building in the country. He added that although the bond of the present contractors was good, it was doubtful if there could be any recovery upon it until the building was completed.
Mr. MOCK was in favor of holding to the original contract, and in holding the present contractors to their contract. He thought they had no right to change that contract. The change in the price of labor and material, of which we have heard so much, should, have nothing to do with the original contract. If these men do not desire to stand by their contract, let them give it up.
Mr. SMITH, of Tippecanoe, was impressed with the question whether or not, like Shylock, we were going to hold every man to his pound of flesh. Whether the State of Indiana, whether it be right or wrong, will require the pound of flesh from every man? If this contact was made at a time when material and labor was at a low price, and it has since advanced, in consequence of which three men have been great losers, the State of Indiana should not say there is your bond, now we want the pound of flesh cut from next your heart. He was on the floor when the bill was passed for the erection of the new State House, and the prevailing opinion then was that the State House could not be built for $2,000,000. Viewing this matter as he did and taking into consideration the fast that the provisions of the bill of the gentleman from Bartholomew-[Mr. McCormick] are for $4,000,000, he was in favor of the bill that did not break the original contract.
Mr. HAM did not understand that the amendment proposed that the State House shall cost two million dollars. His understanding was that if this amendment is adopted it will simply re-enact the old law with one or two exceptions. Now the original bill provides that it may be relet the same contractors, that the Commissioners may relet this contract for a sum not to exceed two million dollars, but no other persons shall be allowed to put in a bid. He was of the opinion that if this contract was relet to the same parties they might be knocking at the door of the next Legislature for another appropriation.
Mr. HUSTON was a member of the Committee which investigated this question, and he was opposed to the adoption of this amendment. He was opposed to the amendment because it required the reletting of the contract, thereby causing great delay in the work and injury to the building in its present condition. Mr. Huston continued at some length.
Mr. HEFFREN moved to postpone the further consideration until 2 o'clock, which was agreed to.
Mr. Bowers' bill [H. R. 191] to regulate the practice of medicine, mid wifery and surgery, was taken up, read the third time, and postponed until 3 o'clock this afternoon.
The House took a recess until 2 o*< look,
