USA > Colorado > History of the State of Colorado, Volume III > Part 8
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55 | Part 56
The act mentioned above, changing the seat of government, pro- vided that the Governor, by and with the advice and consent of the legislative council, should appoint three commissioners on behalf of the Territory to select a site within the city of Denver for the capitol of said Territory, and that such commissioners should within sixty days from the date of their appointment, proceed to select a site, to contain not less than ten acres of land; that the land should be conveyed to the Territory without charge, and the title thereto vested absolutely in the Territory, for the purpose of erecting a capitol and other public buildings thereon. The commissioners so appointed were Joseph M. Marshall of Boulder, William M. Roworth of Gilpin, and Allen A. Bradford of Pueblo.
The site of ten acres comprising blocks 27 and 28 in Henry C. Brown's addition to Denver was chosen, and conveyed as required by law, and is the ground on which the present magnificent edifice is now being erected. To create the nucleus of a fund for building purposes, as the Territory was in rather indigent circumstances and could not therefore make a fitting appropriation to assist the enterprise, certain citizens donated lots and lands as follows :
Samuel E. and Mary E. Browne, one acre in Browne's addition ; Alfred H. Clements, lots one to sixteen in block 320, in Clements' addition.
John Evans and Simeon Whitely, the west half of block 24 in Whitely's addition.
89
HISTORY OF COLORADO.
Henry M. Porter, block 78 in Brown, Smith and Porter's addition. John W. Smith, block 81, in Brown, Smith and Porter's addition. Daniel Witter, lots 26 to 35 inclusive in block 56, in Witter's addition.
Here the matter rested without further definite action until 1874, when by authority of an act approved February 13th in that year, the Governor appointed three commissioners, M. Benedict of Denver, J. H. Pinkerton of Evans, and J. H. Blume of Trinidad, to examine all the titles for lots and parcels of ground theretofore donated to the Territory for capitol purposes, and if any should be found defective to perfect them; to take and have control of the capitol site and capitol fund property; to have the custody of and expend on the improvement of the capitol grounds and in the erection of capitol buildings thereon, any money that might be appropriated by the Territory, the county of Arapahoe, the city of Denver, or by any person or persons for that pur- pose. On and after the Ist of April, 1875, they were authorized to sell at public auction and convey, after due advertisement in the public press, any or all of the lots and lands so donated except the capitol site, and then proceed to expend the money so realized in the erection of a capitol building, provided the cost of the same when completed should not exceed the amount of money actually then on hand, or to be realized within the year 1875, from the sale of lots or from other sources,-the building to be completed, paid for, and delivered to the Territory on or before January Ist, 1876.
The commissioners were required to give bonds in the sum of $5,000 each, conditioned for the faithful discharge of the trust com- mitted to them, and enjoined to make report to the next ensuing as- sembly, as to the manner in which it had been executed.
On the evening of April 16th, 1875, they, together with Hon. W. J. Barker, mayor of the city, and others interested, met at the office of Benedict & Phelps to confer respecting ways and means for beginning and prosecuting work upon a building for legislative and official uses. They were absolutely destitute of public funds, and the highest rational estimate of the value of the lots and lands, provided the titles were
90
HISTORY OF COLORADO.
good, did not exceed $32,000. The subject was discussed, its various phases deliberately considered, and an earnest effort made to discover whether or not a building of any kind was feasible under the circum- stances presented. The urgency of the need was apparent to all. At each recurring session of the assembly great difficulty in procuring suit- able rooms was experienced, and it not infrequently happened that the two branches were widely separated, the Council being established in one quarter of the town and the House of Representatives in another several blocks distant, the committee rooms wherever they could be found, but entirely disconnected from either. There were occasions also, when legislative apartments had to be secured sometime in advance of the sessions in order to get them at all, and the inconvenience was great to all concerned. In addition, Congress never appropriated more than twenty thousand dollars for legislative expenses, which included per diem and mileage, salaries, rent, stationery, printing, etc., and therefore compelled the most rigid economy of expenditure in every department. The various Territorial and Federal offices were scattered over the city, no two being in the same building. It was seen that at the best only a temporary structure could be provided from the sale of lots, even if the highest expectations of their value were realized. Some suggested the construction of a wing that might be used as part of a permanent capitol to be added at a future time when the State should develop and acquire the means for a costly and imposing edifice. At last, after debating the question in all its aspects, a motion was adopted to appoint a committee of three to solicit subscriptions to the capitol fund, and Mr. Daniel Witter proposed that the commissioners be also empowered to receive donations of real estate in lieu of cash, when pre- ferred by the subscriber.
Messrs. Witter, George W. Kassler, John W. Smith, Charles B. Kountze and Henry Crow were appointed to draft a subscription paper and circulate the same. The county commissioners and the city council were requested to provide means for grading and fencing the capitol site, and to adorn the grounds by planting shade trees thereon.
Sherry Snyder.
91
HISTORY OF COLORADO.
Mr. Witter proposed also that the tract be embellished and converted into a public park for the enjoyment of the people. Messrs. Scott J. Anthony, Daniel Witter and Richard E. Whitsitt were authorized to perfect the titles to lots donated.
Had the excellent recommendations advanced at this meeting been carefully executed, even to the extent permitted by the limited means at the disposal of the board, it might, and in all probability would have prevented much expensive litigation that arose in after years from Mr. Henry C. Brown's just demand that his munificent donation should be formally accepted, and appropriated to the purpose for which it was designed, by the addition of proper improvements, even though no building were provided. It would at least have been an acknowledg- ment of his splendid gift, and prepared the way for the next great proceeding subsequently instituted under State auspices.
At a later meeting of the commissioners and others held May 3d, Ex-Governor Evans, who was present, stated his objections to taking any definite action toward a capitol building until the paramount question of the permanent location of the seat of government should have been determined by a vote of the people. The present location at Denver was but temporary, subject to change by the action of any future assem- bly. An Enabling Act had been passed by Congress, and there was good reason for believing that the Territory would be admitted into the Union as a State, when it would come into possession of large grants of land, from the proceeds of which, aided by liberal appropriations, funds would be furnished for such a building as the State should have. Fore- casting the future, he saw the folly of adopting. plans that could only result in a shabby temporary structure, and the sacrifice of properties for insignificant sums, that in due course of the city's growth would become extremely valuable. Events proved the correctness of his views.
A committee that had been appointed to confer with Mr. H. C. Brown relative to his donation of the site, in view of a reported declaration by him that if it were not soon formally accepted and appropriated to State uses, he would revoke his deed of gift and enter suit for restitution
92
HISTORY OF COLORADO.
of the property, reported substantially as follows: That if $50,000 or more should be judiciously expended thereon by the commissioners, and if the capital should be removed to another town and thereby cause the property to revert to him, the city of Denver and himself should be equal owners in the ten acres of land designed for a capitol site.
Without needless waste of words, the proceedings taken by the commissioners ended with this meeting. Comprehending that the means at their disposal were wholly inadequate to the purpose; that they could not be augmented by popular subscriptions, and that while the question of permanent location remained undetermined, with the possibility that when submitted to vote another town might be chosen, they wisely con- cluded to proceed no further. They made no report to the legislature, nor was anything further done until May 9th, 1879, when Mr. Brown, the donor, filed with the county clerk a deed of revocation, on the ground that the site had not been formally accepted nor improved by Territorial or State authority, that the State did not succeed to the rights of the Territory in this land, etc., etc., and immediately proceeded to reclaim it by erecting a board fence around the entire tract. Charles W. Wright, then Attorney-General, brought an action in ejectment for the State, and obtained judgment. Under the statute Mr. Brown was granted a new trial, which he brought before Judge Thomas M. Bowen, and secured judgment in his favor, the court holding that the land was dedicated on a condition subsequent, viz., its improvement for capitol purposes, and there was a breach of this condition. The State paid the costs and was granted a new trial by Judge Elliott, but a change of venue was taken and the cause heard by Judge Mitchell in Jefferson County, when the State was again victorious. Mr. Brown appealed to the Supreme Court of the State, when the judgment of the court below was affirmed. The case was next taken to the Supreme Court of the United States, on a writ of error. Meantime, Mr. Charles H. Toll, one of the more brilliant of our rising young attorneys, had been elected Attorney-General, who filed a motion with the court to dismiss the writ of error for want of jurisdiction ; also to advance the cause on the docket in the event of failure to dismiss.
93
HISTORY OF COLORADO.
October 11th, 1881, General Toll went down to Washington to secure a hearing on these motions, and at length succeeded in confirming the State title to the much contested capitol site. Mr. James H. Brown, son of the claimant, then scarcely past his majority, but already rated as one of the brightest and most earnest students of law, began the liti- gation anew in the United States Circuit Court for the District of Col- orado, before Judge Hallett, where judgment was rendered against him. He appealed to the court of last resort at Washington. In January, 1885, when Theodore H. Thomas assumed the duties of Attorney-Gen- eral, he found the case of Henry C. Brown vs. J. B. Grant, Governor et al pending in the United States Supreme Court. Under the circum- stances already mentioned (measures for building a capitol), it became a matter of great importance to secure an early adjudication of the title. The board of capitol managers thereupon employed Mr. Thornton H. Thomas, brother of the Attorney-General, as special counsel to assist the latter in the case. A motion to advance the cause on the docket was successfully made in person by the Attorney-General. Briefs were then prepared, and December 14th, 1885. the case was orally argued by his brother before the court. In January, 1886, a decision was rendered whereby the title to the capitol site of ten acres was adjudged to be absolutely and finally in the State of Colorado.
It is a fact worthy of note in this connection, that the attorneys on both sides were very young men, Mr. James H .. Brown being only twenty-one years of age when he engaged in it, and the Thomas Brothers (twins) only thirty, Mr. Toll also being of the latter age when he made his argument and secured confirmation of title in the first instance. Mr. Brown, it was universally admitted, prepared his case with unusual ability, and argued it to the close in a manner to bring him great prestige, even though unsuccessful.
Our State Constitution, Section 2, Article VIII, provided that the legislature at its first session subsequent to the year 1880, should provide by law for submitting the question of the permanent location of the seat of government to the qualified electors at the general election then next
94
HISTORY OF COLORADO.
ensuing, and in Section 4 of the same article, that the Assembly should make no appropriation or expenditure for capitol buildings or grounds until the seat of government should be permanently located. Action was taken as required, and on Tuesday, November 8th, 1881, the question was submitted to popular vote with the result subjoined .
Denver received. 30,248 votes.
Pueblo received 6,047 votes.
Colorado Springs received 4,790 votes.
Canon City received. 2,788 votes.
Salida received 695 votes.
Scattering 929 votes.
This action determined the question in favor of the city of Denver, and prepared the way for the erection of a capitol in consonance with the dignity of a large and prosperous commonwealth.
In 1881 the legislature appropriated $5,000 to be expended in grading the capitol site, fencing the same, and in the purchase and planting of maple and elm trees; in plowing and seeding the land; for the use of water thereon for two years; for laying water pipes, the erection of a temporary frame house to be occupied by an overseer ; the purchase of tools for repairs and other incidental expenses. But those things were not to be done until after the decision of the United States Supreme Court confirming the title to the State.
By a subsequent act, approved February 11th, 1883, to provide for the erection of a State capitol building and creating a Board of " Di- rection and Supervision," the sum of $150,000 was appropriated for the construction of "a wing to what is now or may hereafter be the capitol building of the State of Colorado, in the city of Denver, to be expended under the control and supervision of a board of seven managers; the Governor to be a member and chairman, the remaining six to be John L. Routt, Dennis Sullivan, George W. Kassler, Alfred Butters, E. S. Nettleton and W. W. Webster." They were to serve without compen- sation, except that each member, save the Governor, should receive four dollars per day for each day necessarily employed in his duties, and
95
HISTORY OF COLORADO.
actual traveling expenses. They were authorized to employ a clerk and to pay him a reasonable compensation. Within thirty days after the taking effect of this act they were to advertise in certain newspapers in Colorado, and one each in Chicago and St. Louis, inviting architects to furnish plans and specifications. One wing of the building to be con- structed at a cost not to exceed $200,000, and to be ready for occupancy by December 1st, 1884.
At the same session a bill to provide for the creation of a bonded indebtedness on behalf of the State to the amount of $300,000, and for the submission of this proposition to a vote of the qualified electors at the next general election in November of that year was passed, the bonds to run fifteen years at six per cent., and to be sold at par value.
The capitol commissioners qualified and entered upon their duties as prescribed by law. Their first meeting was held February 24th, 1883, when George T. Clark was elected secretary. One of the first move- ments was to invite by advertisement and circular letters, the owners of stone quarries within the State to furnish samples of building stone for inspection, on or before March 30th proximo. In response, a large col- lection of really beautiful specimens of sandstone, granite, marble, etc., representing quarries in different parts of the State were received, making a remarkably fine exhibit, and for the first time demonstrating by such concentrated effort the extraordinary excellence and diversity of our resources in that line. Chemical and mechanical tests followed under the direction of the Denver Society of Civil Engineers, to whom they were intrusted by the board. They were assisted in making the tests by Prof. Regis Chauvenet, President of the State School of Mines, Prof. J. A. Sewall of the Colorado University, and Prof. P.H. Van Diest.
That the commissioners might be more fully advised in their duties, and also of the various styles of architecture and internal arrangement of such edifices, they visited and carefully inspected the capitols of Iowa, Wisconsin, Indiana, Illinois and Kansas, where they acquired much val- uable data relating to the material used, manner of constructing, and the cost of such buildings, and thereby reached the wise conclusion that a
96
HISTORY OF COLORADO.
statehouse for Colorado should not be built piecemeal, but as a whole, and that it could not be erected under existing laws relating to that sub- ject. Meanwhile, their advertisements to the architects brought nine sets of plans, but as the impracticability of constructing a wing became more and more manifest, they decided to take no further action until after their report should be submitted to the legislature, and its further will expressed. To hasten the matter, the board recommended an extra session of the assembly. Governor Grant in reply (June 19th, 1884), deemed it inadvisable to call an extra session. They had started out, he said, to build a million dollar capitol with $80,000 cash and an appeal to the people for permission to borrow $300,000 additional, which might be refused when the vote came to be taken, and this would leave the board in a very embarrassing position. The upshot of the matter was the board resolved to reject all plans submitted, and await the regular meeting of the General Assembly for the perfection of measures that would meet the desires of the people.
In the interim, incidental matters pertaining to titles for lots and lands contributed to the building fund, were examined by direction of the Attorney General, and by authority of law purchased from W. S. Cheesman and George W. Kassler the block of ground adjoining and fronting the capitol site for $100,000, which extended the grounds from Grant avenue to Broadway. The Attorney General called to his aid V. D. Markham and Hugh Butler. After much delay and many vex- atious complications the matter of titles was arranged, and the properties rightfully held by the State sold. Meanwhile the capitol site was sur- veyed by Mr. W. H. Graves, a map thereof drawn, and the grading executed as required by the act of February 11, 1881.
In the execution of these preparatory efforts, which included an indefinite number of analyses and tests of building stone, the time passed until the meeting of the Assembly in 1885. Governor Grant had been succeeded in office by Benjamin H. Eaton, to whom the board rendered a full report of their transactions and proceedings.
From the plans submitted by architects-twenty-one sets-the
97
HISTORY OF COLORADO.
board, by the aid of a committee of experts, had accepted three, viz .: The first, drawn by E. E. Myers, of Detroit, Michigan ; the second, by F. E. Edbrooke & Co. of Denver ; and the third, by H. B. Seeley of Denver. This done, they decided that no money should be paid for any plan until a contract should be let for a building whose total cost should not exceed one million dollars, and if found impracticable to let a contract on any one of the three plans selected, with such modifications as might be agreed upon, for the amount named, then such plans were to be rejected.
Architect Myers asked for and was granted two to three months' time for the completion of detail drawings and specifications for con- tractors to bid from, but owing to his illness they were not furnished until January 2d, 1886. After certain changes had been made in con- formity to the latest legislative action, proposals were advertised for. February 20th, 1886, the board opened the proposals, but every bid was in excess of the limit of cost, therefore much cutting and trimming of details was rendered necessary. At last the contract was awarded to Mr. W. D, Richardson for $930,485, upon the reduced plans by E. E. Myers. Mr. Edbrooke received $1,000 for his plans, and H. B. Seeley $800 for his. Peter Gumry was made superintendent of construction at a salary of $2,500 per annum, and Thomas Mullen assistant at $1,500 per annum. It is unnecessary to follow the perplexing incidents at- tending this work. The material for the superstructure,-Fort Collins sandstone having been selected for the foundation,-became a matter of vital importance ; therefore, in March, 1886, the board entered upon a tour of investigation which embraced all the prominent quarries in the Rocky Mountains. They were accompanied by the supervising ar- chitect Myers, the contractor, and the superintendent of construction. At a later time Messrs. Nettleton and Gumry were constituted a special sub-committee to examine a certain deposit of fine white sandstone in Gunnison county, on which a favorable report was rendered, whereupon the board made an inspection of the same, and on the 31st of July ordered the superstructure to be built of that material.
7 III.
98
HISTORY OF COLORADO.
The contract with Richardson was executed April Ist, 1886, and he soon afterward left for the East to purchase and forward machinery and appliances, but was taken dangerously ill, so that nothing of im- portance was done until July 6th, when the excavations for the sub- structure began and were completed September 15th. The concrete base was finished November 10th following.
In the meantime Hon. Theodore H. Thomas, Attorney General, had brought the main question of title to the capitol site to a conclusion before the Supreme Court at Washington, by final decision rendered January 4th, 1886, and had instituted suits in the State courts against various parties to recover certain lots and lands under deeds of do- nation. The lots that had been sold brought $93,233 to the capitol fund. The act of April Ist, 1885, continued the board of managers as originally constituted, for six years, increased their compensation to five dollars per diem, prohibited them from taking any interest whatever in any contract relating to the building, and advanced the salary of the secretary to $2,000 a year. The extreme limit of expenditure on the capitol was fixed at one million dollars, and divided as follows: For 1885, $200,000 ; for 1886, 1887, 1888 and 1889 the same, dividing it into five equal portions, and requiring that the edifice be completed by January Ist, 1890.
But "the best laid schemes of mice and men gang aft agley." In excavating for the foundation it was found necessary to go deeper than was calculated in the original estimates in order to reach a secure base, which necessarily enhanced the cost. Certain other alterations were made in the building plans; therefore, in May, 1888, the contract was amended and relet. Next ensued vexatious complications with Mr. Richardson, who had exceeded his estimates and involved unwarranted expenditures, an account of which was rendered, and the board re- quested to provide for them. A meeting was held, the matter rigidly investigated, and an order issued to suspend work. Richardson became heavily involved with creditors who had furnished materials, and they filed suits against him, The board measured up the work performed,
99
HISTORY OF COLORADO.
and submitted a well digested report thereon. A bitter controversy followed. All the material on the ground was attached. The case went to the courts on an action commenced by Richardson to recover the sum of $72,066.05 alleged to be due him on the contract. The commissioners instructed Attorney General Alvin Marsh to defend the suit, and retained Platt Rogers as assistant counsel. They sent notices to Richardson's bondsmen notifying them that unless they should appear and show cause to the contrary at a meeting of the board to be held February 9th, ISSS, work under the contract would be declared abandoned, and they would proceed to complete or relet the same, holding Richardson and his sureties liable for any and all damages.
This evoked a response from Frank W. Tracy and George M. Brinkerhoff of Springfield, Illinois, the contractors' sureties, saying that Richardson had expended his entire fortune on the work, and would have continued had not the board declined to pay him the amounts due under the terms of the contract. They denied that there had been any such abandonment of the work as to call for a forfeiture of the contract ; or that they themselves had incurred any liability under the bond, con- cluding with the observation that if the board would pay Richardson his just claim they would be willing to aid him to finish his contract.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.