1872. adding 2 per cent. to the bill of details, and he would ask whether he also is in the habit of adding 2 per cent. to the actual bill of quantities itself, and whether that bill is always shown to his client ? Mr. Crarxe.—Yes: invariably. As a rule he did not take out the quantities without being asked by the principal. In the recent instance he had men- tioned he charged 2 per cent.; this was known to the principal, who made the contract upon adding 2 per cent. Whether for measuring or taking out quantities the charge appears, and is seen by the principal. Without taking out quantities, an architect may write a specification and know how to carry out a building; but taking them out is a great assistance, by which any possible error is easily found out and rectified. Mr. T’'Anson, Vice-President, presumed that with all the first thing desired is to maintain a position of the utmost possible independence; that we should stand, both with respect to the client and to the builder, in a position that neither one nor the other can impugn our entire honesty ; and that, therefore, we should divest ourselves as much as_ possible of any monetary transactions, except the recognised commission for our work. Though it appeared to him yesterday an equitable and just thing that the quantities should be made part of the contract, yet he felt there were difficulties in adopting that plan. Mr. I’Anson proceeded to say,—Mr. Clarke admits he has received money from the builder for the quantities he took out. I must own, I think it is the worst thing that can bedone. However much we respect builders as a class, we ought to hold ourselves above receiving money from them. Unless that proviso is secured, it would weigh against the abstract justice and right of making the quantities part of the contract. I feel it is only just and right that the builder should be paid for what he does, and in no other way can that be better secured than by making the bill of quantities part of the contract. I see the difficulties on both sides of the question, but I suggest whatever view we adopt, it should be one which makes us absolutely independent of the builder ; and that to ensure that independence ought to be our great aim. Mr. C. Doveias (Glasgow Architectural Society) agreed with the last speaker that the architect ought to be entirely independent of the money results of his buildings. An architect is brought into great temptation if it is his interest to show that his work is completed cheaper than it ought to be; and that temptation exists when he takes out his own quantities. In Scotland Mr. Douglas did not know any architect who takes out his own quantities, nor had he heard of any one taking out quantities for another. An entirely different rule prevails. A surveyor in England is called a measurer in Scotland. The architect prepares the plans, specifications, and a schedule—Anglicé, a bill of quantities. In Glasgow there is seldom at the beginning an estimate of the absolute and exact sum to be paid for the building; but the original estimate is really the price list based upon the prices that will regulate the work; and on the completion of the building, in almost all cases, the work has to be measured and totalled at the original prices in the schedule of quantities. The architect has nothing to do with the result of his work, further than to maintain his professional character, which would be damaged if his work were completed greatly in excess of his original estimate. He thought very favourably of this plan, by which the contractor is paid for every item of work that he does, andno more. The careful archi- tect will prepare his plans and specification so as to represent and describe his work fully. It then lies with the surveyor to take out the quantities to the credit of all concerned. For this he receives from 1} to 2 per cent. commission, according to the difficulty of the work or the distance from his place of residence. [In answer to a question—how the prices are obtained for the schedule, and whether by competition ?] Mr. Douglas said the measurer or Surveyor prepares the schedule, which differs from the English one in this respect: English bills of quantities consist very much of a lot of arithmetic, whereas the Scotch ones give a description of the work incorporated with the bill of quantities, and so fully in many cases that it is searcely necessary to write a specification. There is no difficulty on this principle in arriving at the cost of a building, and he scarcely knew of legal proceedings to ascertain the final cost. The contractor by competition furnishes the prices for the schedules, which are issued to all who apply with a view to forward an estimate. Mr. Epwarps (Dundee) differed from the last speaker, having during thirty years’ practice as an architect taken out his own quantities, there being
THE BUILDING NEWS. Ho
dan: 5: iG } eee no resident surveyor in his district. He did not see any great fear of the architect and the builder entering into collusion against the employer, if the architect were paid by the builder for taking out the quantities. Having taken out the quantities under their various heads—walling, brickwork, floor- ing, slating, lead work, &e., the architect advertises and invites contractors to tender. Parties apply for the quantities, of which they fill in the value, according to certain rates, it being understood that additions or deductions are to be ascertained on completion of the work, and made accordingly. Very few contractors, he found, can take out quan- tities. Should the proprietor wish to know the cost before the work is thrown open to competition, the architect goes through the quantities and prices them. Kuowing pretty well the rates of the contractors, he can form a close estimate of the whole outlay. The proprietor being satisfied that this will not exceed the sum intended, the architect then draws out a schedule of quantities, and advertises for contractors. The contractor chosen pays the architeet for these, and it comes to the same thing whether the architect is paid by the contractor or whether the charge is taken out of the first instalment. He (Mr. Edwards) did not see any difference whether the contractor or the principal pays, as there is no risk of collusion between the parties, Mr. Rickman, Associate, said the usual course in obtaining estimates is to give each builder the labour of ahi through long bills of quantities; but it is possible to save that trouble, and enable them to arrive at a better result. Some clients engaged in building, who understand their position, have no con- tract, but apply to a builder they can trust, and ensure him a fixed percentage on the actual cost of the work. Another way to save a great amount of labour to builders is for the surveyor preparing the quantities to price out the bills themselves, and a total being arrived at, the builders tender at a percentage under that fixed sum, all requisite information being furnished by the surveyor. Some mistakes may be make by the surveyor ; but very serious ones, difti- cult to rectify, arise from the carelessness of builders making their own estimates. ———— THE UTILISATION OF SEWAGE AT MILAN. OW that the sewage question is prominently brought into public notice, and especially as an important branch of the subject has again been raised by Mr. Bailey Denton’s paper on “Sewage as a Fertiliser of Land, and Land as a Purifier of Sewage,” some particulars, given in the Society of irts’ Journal, as to what is being done at Milan by the Soziet&a Vespasiana, a company established about two years ago for dealing with the liquid refuse of the public urinals in that city, will be of interest. The urine is sold at the rate of 50 centimes per 100 litres (or less than one farthing per gallon) in petroleum barrels, holding about 175 litres each, so that the value of a barrel would be nearly 90 cen- times. The barrels are lent gratis to the purchaser for ten days, after which time five centimes per day are charged for the hire of each barrel. The urine sold as manure is mixed with water or earth, in the proportion of one part urine to two parts earth or water. This mixture forms an excellent manure for almost every kind of crop, but more especially for cereals and meadow lands. A mixture of peat and urine is sold at 2°50f. per quintal (about 1s. per ewt.), and is highly recom- mended as a manure for mulberry trees and for market gardens. A chemical process, introduced by Dr. Cardone, is adopted by the company for precipitating the fer- tilising part of the urine, especially rich in nitrogen and phosphates. The powder so obtained is sold in sacks, at the rate of 20 francs per quintal (8s. per ewt.), and is used for manuring maize, in the pro- portion of about a table-spoonful to each plant; some farmers add also a small quantity of ashes. For potatoes, 30 kilogrammes of precipitate to about the same quantity of dry earth, well mixed together, should be used and scattered over the land. Other crops are manured with a mixture of precipitate and earth in the proportion of one part of the former to two of the latter. For wheat, it is found advan- tageous to add to the above-mentioned mixture an equal quantity of ashes. The quantity of precipitate required to manure a hectare is fifteen quintals, or twelve ewt. per acre. Theresidue liquid from the precipitating process, con- taining a large amount of potassa, is used most advantageously as a liquid manure for meadows, and
is sold for this purpose at the rate of 40 centimes
per barrel, containing 175 litres.
THE INFLUENCE OF OUR PUBLIC
GARDENS.
S$ the young artist looks to Italy for models and
for inspiration, so look numbers of untravelled
amateurs and gardeners to ow great National
Gardens, and herce a reason why their true charac-
ter and importance, as regards the art of laying out
grounds, should be widely known throughout the
land. The chief public gardens of a country must
haye a powerful influence on its private ones, and it
is most unfortunate that with us this influence can
rarely be anything but injurious to all the true in-
terests of garden design. Most of our public
gardens and parks are designed in direct violation of
the very essentials of the art of laying out grounds ;
many of them show precisely what to avoid, and
though this merit is not alluded to in their gnide-
books, it may, to one who rightly uses it, be of
greater importance than any other feature. De-
scending or ascending to particulars, let us glance at
a few of our public places. Look at Kew, in some
respects superior to any botanic garden or botanical
establishment in the world, but in point of design no
higher than a chess-board. That breadth—i.c., aa
open spread of lawn here and there—is the most es-
sential principle in garden design one would think
was known to everybody who ever thought of arrang-
ing or planting a public garden or park. Without
this, you cannot get any but a confused effect—you
cannot fully see the beauty and dignity of our now
rich arboreal flora; without this you may have a
thousand kinds of noble trees, and get little better
effect than you do in a large unthinned plantation.
You can, in fact, no more make a really beautiful
garden or park without at least one sweet spread of
open, turfy ground than you can a lake without
water. At Kew, bothin general design and in the
arrangement of details, this principle is completely
ignored, and the good old one of putting in a tree
wherever there is a little opening adopted. The
result is that the finest botanic garden in the world
is devoid of any picturesque beauty. As to the
Paris Botanic Garden, it is infinitely worse; there, not
only is all the breadth destroyed, but even the very
turf has gone!
Take, again, the Royal Horticultural Society’s
garden at South Kensington, and, leaving out of
view entirely the question of style, assume that the
geometrical is the only one. This garden was speci-
ally designed for flower-shows and for the reception
of crowds. Now, if there has been any one thing
taught by all previous experience of large Hower-
shows and the gardens in which they have been held,
it has been that the happiest effect is only attained
where there is a quiet open lawn on which crowds
can promenade at pleasure, and pass from it with
ease to the various important points of interest in
the garden. And what has been done to meet this
want? The design is the most complicated one we
have ever seen even for a geometrical garden. Every
place where a bit of turf might have spread out to
form a foreground, or a setting for the different
objects which a garden should contain, is frittered
away—here a maze (what an idiotic adjunct to any
public garden ranking above that of a tea-house!);
there a short avenue of Lombardy poplars cutting
off the view, for no evident reason; beyond, placed
on a bank, lest its lovely effect should be lost, a fire-
shovel pattern wrought on the earth, with all the
beds filled with broken stone-rubbish of various
colours. In short, there is no room anywhere except
on parched and wearying gravel walks. At every
step a sensitive person who visits the garden in the
hope of seeing trees or plants or flowers is offended
by a sickly low-clipped yew hedge, a dead wall, a
flight of steps, a ghastly corridor, or one of the many
contrivances by which Nature is shut out from the
scene; and if a prize had been offered for the very
worst kind of garden in which to enjoy a flower-
show or plants or trees of any kind, a garden more
fitted to win it could scarcely have been designed.
In this case, however, the deviation from the right
course was so marked that it is not likely to be so
harmful, as the manifold contortions of the scene
disgusted even the admirers of the style; and since
the finishing of this unhappy garden there have been
much fewer gardens of the same style made in con-
nection with country houses.
The only one public garden that betrays any judg- ment or insight into what a garden should be is the small garden of the Royal Botanic Society in the Regent’s Park. We speak not of its coilections, which are poor, nor of its gardening, but simply of its design, when we say that if the judgment which has done so much with eighteen level acres had been equally successful with the vast surfaces in some of our public gardens, they would be models indeed. The Botanic Garden in the Regent’s Park is dis- figured by absurd conglomerations of rock, by a still
