1870.] OF THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES. 1003

and accepted by him, and since the first of January, has
been in the occupation and use of the Governor. It cannot
be pretended that the building was not erected in strict con-
formity with the plan and specifications furnished by the
architect, except in one particular, where a brick nine inch
partition wall was substituted for a studding partition, which
the mechanics considered was essential to the security of the
building. Since the building has been erected in a satisfac-
tory manner, and in conformity with the plans prepared by
the State's architect, and is proved to have cost the sum
charged tor work and materials, the undersigned is at a loss
to conceive any good reason why the State should not pay
the proved value of property which it has thus accepted and
is now using as its own.

The only assignable reason for refusing to deal with this
creditor of the State, as the same Committee has recommend-
ed the General Assembly to deal with other creditors simi-
larly situated, is found in the idea that the Committee on
Public Buildings, who authorized the erection of the Stable,
passed a resolution that its cost should not exceed seven
thousand dollars. But that same Committee approved of
the modified plans and specifications of the architect, and
directed him to proceed in the erection pf the Stable, in con-
formity therewith. It is not claimed that any contract was
ever entered into with Mr. Black, limiting him to the ex-
penditure of seven thousand dollars, or that he was ever in-
formed that any such limitation was applicable to the modi-
fied plans and specifications. What was the builder to do
when he was presented by the architect with the plans, and
told to proceed with the work ? Had he the right to reject
or omit any part of the plan, from the fear that the building
would prove too expensive? His duty required him to follow
the instructions of the architect, notwithstanding he exceed-
ed the sum he might have heard named in the first instance
as the probable cost of the Stable, for he was never furnished
with the detailed estimates of the cost, as first planned. He
had no more right to depart from the specifications than the
builder of the Executive Mansion would have had to vary or
limit the designs furnished him by the same architect.

That the cost exceeded the first rough estimate is not a
novel or unusual circumstance. The same result appeared
in connection with the Executive Mansion, but the Commit-
tee after full examination, became satisfied that this excess
was unavoidable, and very properly reported a bill to pay
the whole amount of the deficiency. If the builder followed
the official plans and specifications as he is shown to have
done, and if the work was faithfully done, as is also conced-
ed on all hands, the undersigned do not believe it to be con-
sistent with fairness to withhold from him the compensation