e
ne a 26, Lor2.
Autercommunication, —>— QUESTIONS, (2438.] —Flooring. — Will some correspondent please give a definition of the following kinds of floor, ing? Rough edges shot, wrought and laid folding- oe and straight joint, and splayed headings.— [2489.]—Price per Cube Foot.—Would an respondent kindly inform me of the prices per nase foot (ineluding roof) generally charged in England for public buildings such as the Chester Townhall, also the prices charged for common tenements built of stock brick with stone dressings? P.S.—Be kind enough to give the average prices, as I haye applied to several places for those prices, but have never received a satisfactory answer.—M. WADDELL, Glasgow. [2440.]—Earth Closets v. Water Closets.—I am about to make some extensive additions to my house for the purposes of a ladies’ school. It isnecessary to construct a ‘tier of three water-closets over each other, Will any of *your numerous correspondents oblige by giving me their adviceas to the practicability of making them good and efficient earth closets? The closets will abut on an outside wall, in which a shaft might be carriedup. The difficulties I see in the matter are the liability ofa shaft to become choked up, and of getting dry earth to the top ofa four-story house for the use of forty or fifty i yIS. ete aie, y y inmates.—J. Davis, (2441,)—Cutting Terra-Cotta.—Will any reader kindly inform me of the simplest mai i terra-cotta }—T. C. H. 3 ae a REPLIES. [2414.]—Percentage.—Perhaps my reply wa: so clear as it might have been ; but ne Tervied oe vey that if a surveyor has to estimate in his bills of quantities work in which materials are provided by the proprietor, he is undoubtedly entitled to calculate his commission on the whole value of the work, unless, as is sometimes done, he agrees for a higher rate of percentage upon the net value as per builder’s accep- ted tender.— R. Q. 2 ee [2414.]—Percentage.—The following is an extract from the summary of a bill of quanties of an eminent London surveyor :-— Add surveyor’s charge for quantities 2 percent. £ s. d. on theabove ... oe Ditto for bill of credit |. 1. sa BOBO Paid for lithography, &c. ... - 7180 The words ‘‘the above” in first item referred to the whole of the works, they being estimated as new. The bill of credit in second item referred to a bill which showed the surveyor’s estimate of the quantity of old bricks and timber which were to be re-used, and a quantity of old sound sashes, fencing, pump and piping, which, although not to be re-used, were to be re- moved by and become the property of the contractor, and were of such a nature as to be of some saleable yalue to him. Thus the amount of the bill of credit is deducted from the whole amount of the work otherwise estimated as new work, and the surveyor is fairly paid by the charge made as above. This is, of course, a case in which the successful builder pays the charges of the suryeyer who is nominated by the architect. In the case given by *‘F.” I will assume that the proprietor finds his own timber and bricks ; then the better course would be to prepare the quantities as though the builder were to provide all materials and arrange for alternative tenders, the first for the builder to provide all labour and materials ; the second tender to bea lesser sum in consideration of the proprietor finding his own bricks and timber. The architect and quantity Surveyor would then both found their percentages upon the first tender, whether that or the second were accepted.—F. L. A. _ [2426.])—The Most Seasonable Time for Build- ing.—Cool weather is the best for building in. In a building erected during moist or moderately-rainy Weather, the mortar will set harder than in one built during very hot sunny weather. The heat in the latter case, evaporating the water too quickly out of the lime, leaves it dry and crumbly. In a strong frost the pointing will fall out, in consequence of the water one in the mortar expanding as it freezes,— (2429.]—Size of Schools.—You have thought proper to reprove me for the harshness of my remarks in reply to “S. W. J. G.” and “Constant Reader.” As far as the first-named is concerned, I do not think that I merited such censure. The question showed that “S. W. J. G.” had undertaken a work which re- quired a certain amount of architectural knowledge, and therefore itis presumable that he thought himself possessed of sufficient to carry the work out; also, that he had access to the instructions of the Council on
THE BUILDING NEWS.
Education, andI contend that these latter give all the
information required (even though the designer have
but little experience), and that a more attentive study
of them would have rendered the question superfluous.
With regard to “Constant Reader,” I am willing to
admit that his query is more legitimate than that of
“SW. J. G.;” but not being able to see that it is
capable of areally satisfactory answer, I cannot help
thinking that it is a useless question, and that his best
mode of procedure would be to endeayour to see some
good drawings in which old thatch is shown, which
in most towns would not be a very difficult matter.
In concluding, allow me to thank you for your adyo-
cacy of young inquirers, and to assure you that it was
far from my intention to attempt to snubone of these,
much less to ‘‘sneer” at them, the meaning of such
word being “to insinuate contempt by covert expres-
sions.” ‘This certainly was not my aim, but only to
condemn the introduction of trivial questions into the
columns of “ Intercommunjeation,” from which I grate-
fully acknowledge I have many times received very
valuable information.—W. H. ©.
[2429.]—Size of School-Room.—The length re-
quired for a school-room according to the instructions
of the Committee of Council, and the number of
children specified, would by 52ft. 9in. The arrange-
ment of desks thus—the first (end against wall) for
eight children, 12ft. long, then a space as passage,
lft. Gin.; desk again, 12ft.; curtain space, 3in. ; desk,
12ft.; passage space, Ift. Gin. and the next desk
13ft. Gin., for nine children, the end of this against
the other end wall. This arrangement gives accom-
modation for 99 children, the nearest approach possible
to 100. Therule as to the length of desks is only a
general one.—P. E. M.
[2430.]—Charcoal as a Deodoriser.—Your cor-
respondent will find peat charcoal one of the most
powerful deodorisers, and far superior to wood char-
coal.—R, RupINnG.
(2430.]—Charcoal as a Deodoriser.—W hat
does “*G. L.” wish to deodorise ? Wood charcoal is
the most approved deodoriser for charcoal boxes
fitted to sewer ventilators, but its action is neutra-
lised as soon as it becomes saturated with moisture.
In consequence of some sewers receiving a large quan-
tity of hot water from mannfactories, the steam from
the sewer will completely saturate the charcoal in the
boxes in forty-eight hours. Perhaps I have hit upon
the reason why “C. L.” has found wood charcoal not
efficient.—R. Q.
[2431.]—Ventilating Drains.—“G. J. C. €.”
has one pit cesspool for three cottages; the drain-pipes
from each cottage will, therefore, have an inclination
downwards towards pit cesspool. Would it not be well,
therefore, to put ventilating pipes at higher ends of
drain, say one for each cottage? There ought also to
be syphon-traps at every sink and water-closet, so as to
prevent foul gas coming out at them.—PLUMBER.
[2431.]—Ventilating Drains.—To ventilate the
cesspool is good; but my plan is te go back to the
junction of branches into the main, and next the june-
tion on the cesspool side insert a syphon trap, and
next the syphon (still on the cesspool side) to ventilate,
by using a drain-pipe with an eye, and carrying a pipe
therefrom. My theory is that whatever impure gas is
in the drain, and would be acting upon the water in
the trap, is carried off at once; this, of course, is the
highest part of the drain up to that point. A. The
syphon, with opening for cleansing purposes 5 B, the hole for ventilation.—T. C. H. [2431.] Ventilating Drains.—Sewer gas ascends to the highest part of a drain, or branch of a drain, and accumulates beneath the traps. To take a pipe, therefore, from the cesspool only and carry it up the wall of the house would not be doing all that is necessary, the cesspool being the lowest part of the drain. The better way is to carry up a pipe in the manner mentioned in the question, but from a point immediately below the trap of each branch of the drain, and as vertically as possible. For instance, if the houses are not large there may be no more than two branches—one from the water-closet and another from the kitchen or scullery sink. Common din, rain- water piping will do very well if the joints be care- fully stopped with red lead putty.—C. 8. [2432.]Sanitary Engineering.—The sewage question isa very large one, and does not admit of being summed up in a few words, but an answer to the ques- tion may be attempted. In the first place it is incon- sistent to say that sewage carried directly to land by water running through sewers is more decomposed than if it had been left behind in cesspools, which are emptied but seldom. Sewage used to irrigate land is generally applied to it within 24 or 48 hours of its entry into the drains, but ¢ ssspools are not emptied so often asthat. Nevertheless, sewage does undergo de- composition faster when much diluted with water than it does when no water has access to it; and the im- proyed plan now being carried out experimentally at Manchester, as stated by ‘* W. H. C.,” consists chiefly of the exclusion of surface water from the cesspools,
79 peo ee RE BUILDING NEW Sn and so far arresting decomposition. To the question whether ‘it is not possible that sanitary engineers are all the while attacking the effect and not the cause, both as regards the ventilation of the sewers and the utilisation of sewage,” no better answer can be given than that they are trying to remedy a bad existing state of things. The sewers have in many towns been made and the houses drained into them, but the venti- lation of both—or rather the ventilation of the house drains, which is the chief consideration—has beem generally neglected. And now, for the time being, whatever ultimately may be done, sanitary engineers are trying to remedy a defect im an existing system. And let not “ W. H. C.” place any more difficulties in the way than there are at present. However much “ow. H. G.” may disagree with recent attempts to deal with the sewage difficulty, I am glad to see that he dis- approves of the old leaky cesspool or midden, for no invention of an enemy could have been more detri- mental to our welfare. While sanitary engineers in other parts of the country are trying to amend the present state of things in respect of the water carriage system of sewerage, they do not begrudge the attempts made in Manchester or elsewhere to amend the system that has been there so extensively adopted, and which, hitherto, has been thoroughly bad.—C. 8. [2433.] Cesspool Plts.—Of course a pit cesspool will fill up when it has to be cleaned out. If pit cess- pools are made of the proper size, properly put in, and properly attended to, instead of becoming nuisances they may become sources of usefulness and profit. In fact, I am not sure but that pit cesspools will yet play a very important part in the improvement of our present systems of house drainage and town sewage. T intend to think this over, and may, perhaps, be able to say more again.—PLUMBER. (2437.] Rendering Account of Steward- ship.—As to architects furnishing proprietors with detailed bills of extras and omissions, custom varies very much. I adopt the system of providing a full- measured account of each variation and alteration from the contract, giving first full particulars of the extras, but without prices, simply stating at the foot of the extra bill that the whole amounts to a certain sum. The omitted works are treated in like manner. My reason for this is that under most building contracts the architect is quasi-arbitrator. If the prices of each item were given he would probably have the pro- prietor picking out all that he considered (with an in- sufficient knowledge of the facts) to be high, and on the otherhand, the builder would select a large number which he might consider too low; so that, between both, scarcely an item would remain unchallenged.— R. Q. ee LEGAL INTELLIGENCE. INSTABILITY OF A STRUCTURE No Excuse FOR CARELESSNESS IN Knockine 1r Down.—The case of Shaw v. the London and North-Western Railway Company, heard last week in the City of London Jourt, was an action brought by Mr. M. T. Shaw, builder, of Waterloo-bridge Wharf, for £9 Os. 3d., cost of repairing a wall broken by the negligence of the Company’s servants. Mr. Bennett, for the plaintiff, said that the plaintiff's foreman sent by letter asking the Company to deliver eight or nine loads of building materials. This was done by Messrs. Chaplin & Horne, the Company's agents, and in backing the horses out of the yard knocked down the pier of the gates, for repairing which this action was brought. Mr. Pitch, for defendants, asked the foreman how long the gates had been erected, and it was in dispute whether the mortar was firmly set, but His Honour remarked that that would not affect the case; the instability of a structure was no excuse for carelessness from any one, whether aware of such instability or not. Mr. Little, a builder to the Merchant Taylors’ Company and other public bodies, was called, and examined as to the items in the bill of repairs, which he said were fair and reasonable. Mr. Fitch objected that the Company itself was not liable for the damage done by its agents ; but it was decided that they were acting as the servants of the Company. ‘The items were made the subject of evidence in detail, and eventually His Honour gave judgment for the plaintiff, £8. DisputEep RigHT oF WAY TO THE THAMES EM- BANKMENT.—THE MARQUIS OF SALISBURY v. THE MrrropotiraAN Boarp oF Works.—The Marquis of Salisbury is the tenant for life of property in Cecil and Salisbury-streets, Strand, and of property at a lower level at the end of those streets and now ad- joining the Thames Embankment. The Embank- ment was constructed under an Act of Parliament passed in 1862, and under subsequent Acts passed in 1869 and 1870 ornamental grounds adjoining the Salisbury estate had been formed. Hoardings were erected to separate the reclaimed ground from the Thames by the Metropolitan Board, and the pro- perty, at the low level, of the plaintiff. The plain- tiff and his tenants had no access from or through the plaintiff's low level property to the Embankment. The access to that property was by a street of steep eradient called Carting-lane, leading from the Strand. The plaintiff alles l that the Acts of Parliament reserved to him full and free access to and from his low level property and the Thame mbankment for s and earri , and much correspondence had passed between the solicitors of the parties in refe- rence to the right claimed. The plaintiff's case now was that he wished to build or to grant leases for
ho
