Jone 21, 1872. THE BUILDING NEWS. 511 o>>>>=>=__=«K==<«*x[x=[_lw’&®@®_e—][]__)_]_]]{{x{_"_————— rr
work: a sort of description of the kind of work re- quired (as “ruble,” ‘ hammer-dressed,” ‘“ droved,” or “‘polished”’), of the mode of construction, the sizes for this and that purpose, the kind and quality of materials, &c., which was sometimes a docu- ment of thirty or forty pages. The- specification may, perhaps, still be used by very particular archi- tects for very particular work, but, as arule, all the descriptions, &c., are now embodied in the schedule. Formerly, the specification accompanied the plans in going to the measurer’s, and a copy of it was put into the hands of the clerk of works for his guidance in the execution of the work; but now the plans are accompanied by only a few jottings of the speciali- ties, and the clerk of works has to be contented with an unpriced copy of the schedule. When the schedule is returned (priced) by the party estimating, it is called an “estimate.” If the parties estimating are selected, almost invariably the lowest offer is accepted, and commonly the only contract is the offering by the one party and the accepting (in writing) by the other. I have seen ‘ contracts” regularly constructed by solicitors ; this, however, very rarely. Advertising for tradesmen to offer is not common with us, neither is paying for the schedule—I mean each tradesman estimating de- positing a fee for a copy. The expense of all schedules and of after measurement is borne equally by the proprietor and the contractors. When the work is completed the measurer measures it, and tabulates the executed quantities in a docu- ment called a “measurement.” The quantities (be they more or less than in the schedule) are priced at the “estimate” rates, and if any kind of work be done that has not been scheduled the cash column opposite to it is left blank by the measurer to be filled in in pencil by the contractor with what he considers a fit charge, when on the completion of the document it is handed to him for revision. When the measurement is returned by the contractor to the measurer these pencilled prices are put in in blue ink, so that they may arrest the attention of the architect when he goes over the measurement before signing his name to its being “correct.” It is in the arehitect’s power to reduce the ‘blue prices” if he thinks them an overcharge. Of course, instalments of money are paid during the progress of the work, and the contractor gets the balance on pre- sentation of the measurement when certified as correct by the architect. The proprietor generally retains the measurement as his final receipt; and hence I have been unable to send a specimen. The chief advantage of this system appears to be that it clearly demonstrates to the proprietor that he pays for only that which he has got, and to the contractor that he gets paid for all for which he has wrought. It suits also the convenience of the Scottish architect, who generally gives his full size and other details piecemeal, as the work progresses - and they are immediately required, instead of ex- hibiting them at first along with the drawings to a scala It allows also of deviations to be made from the original design, as more or less work will be charged by only the estimate price. The ‘‘ lump sum” system is sometimes used by some of our architects, but Ido not thinkit safe. I recollect two instances of its operation, one of which gave loss, the other trouble. In the one a London architect had designed a mansion for a Scottish nobleman, and the mason in estimating omitted all the window-lintels, by which he lost a good many hundred pounds. In the other a Glasgow architect had designed a church for Edinburgh, and when the Spire came to beexecuted the mason complained that the details then given were very different from those that he had originally seen, and refused to proceed further with the work. The building remained in statu quo for some months, and operations were not resumed until the details were modified. Had there been after-measurement the one mason would not have lost money, nor would the other have stopped his work. Hoping that I have been throughout intelligible, I am, &e. Tuomas GILDARD. 31, Elderslie-street, Glasgow, June 10. A FEW THOUGHTS ON ART CRITICS. Srr,—It may seem strange that a man should have to apologise for presuming to speak or think on art as connected with his own trade, but it is so, and the only excuse I can offer is that every one else except a decorator having had his say, I see no reason why I should not have mine. Having worked as a journeyman and foreman for twenty-four years, I have seen a good deal of the inner life of jobs, and during that time I have carried out successfully for my employers, and satisfactorily to their clients, some of the largest and most elaborate jobs in Great Britain, so that I ought to know something of the matter. I am perfectly aware that it might be said
better than I can say it, and that I shall rouse a good
deal of ill-feeling, but I wish to say what I really
think is the truth. I should like to know, in the
first place, what special training or opportunity our
critics have had to fit them for their self-imposed
task. Have they read more, studied more, seen
more examples either abroad or at home, or had
more practice than the men who make a trade of it ?
I think not. Their chief recommendation seems to
be to find fault with every one except themselves.
Without being personal, I shall give a few instances
of their differences. One begs us to follow truth
and to avoid all shams (aping Mr. Ruskin). To one
who knows him naturally arises the question: Does
he mean it? One employed a clever decorator to
work for him at a little job, which he shows to
his admiring friends as his own. ‘I had a man
to do the merely mechanical part,’ he says, and his
friends swear by him ever afterwards. You speak
of one gentleman who cannot get men to do work up
to his standard of art, and so in future will do only
low-class work. How do such men as Crace,
Clayton & Bell, Jackson & Graham, Morant,
Moxon, and many other firms get their work done,
embracing as it does Gothic, Grecian, and Italian
art, and consequently figures, flowers, and animals ?
Perhaps his standard is higher than theirs; if so, I
confess I don’t understand it. One grumbles at Mr.
Scott handing over cathedral after cathedral to
Clayton & Bell to be decorated; and another, in
an article headed “Blunt Razors,” advocates an
architect always employing the same staff, as they
understand his ways. The truth is, that not one
architect in twenty understands anything but the
merest trifle about decorations, and if he does, and
has a good practice, he cannot devote the time neces-
sary to carry out a job. You last week advocated
the employment of an artist for the decoration of S.
Paul’s, but you seem to think that a decorator cannot
be an artist, and that to paint heroic figures a man
should begin by painting small pictures. Youhave
got a body of men whose whole life has been passed
in acquiring experience, and carrying out jobs on a
large scale, and as they are apparently to be put on
one side at the bidding of our self-elected critics,
clergymen who haye little to do, gentlemen who
have nothing to do, architects who would like
something to do, &e.
painters? They, at all events, are better fitted
to deal with large masses of colouring than a
man who will spend a month on a piece of canvas
12 by 8. You have got Beverly, Grieve, Telbin,
Callcott, and many others, and I suppose few critics
will venture to say they cannot draw or paint. At
all events, it would, I think, be the wisest step of the
two, and I would sooner trust either of them to doa
large work than all the Forty put together. The
most lamentable fiascos I have ever seen have arisen
from employing men who were accustomed to do
small work (and good artists at that) to do large
ones. They have not got the dash that is required
for large work, they really bestow too much pains
and labour on their work, and when seen from a
moderate distance, it has not the effect that is re-
quired. Having thrown out this suggestion, I beg
to subscribe myself, yours, &e.,
A ProressIonaL DECORATOR.
THE DUBLIN EXHIBITION.
Sir,—It is usually the rule with architects to give
the credit for such works as they only direct and do
not design to the artists thereof. In the Dublin
Exhibition building the decorations were not only
executed but designed by Mr. Edward Bell, of London,
although the person who sent you the grandiloquent
notice of them takes all the credit to himself.—I am,
&e., JUSTICE.
PLAGIARISM. Srr,—Your correspondent ‘‘ A Disinterested Looker- on,” like most such correspondents, is very deficient in his powers of observation, or he would have known that the Bristol Assize Courts were designed some years before the Plymouth Guildhall, and that the latter is simply a replica of the former. As one who has been with Mr. Godwin in former years, I cannot but laugh at the absurdity of your correspondent’s supposition that he could copy another’s work, and it certainly is a great joke for a man to be charged with plagiarism for reproducing his own design,—I am, &c., G. F. R. ———<H— On Saturday last, Messrs. R. M. & H. Whiting, builders, of Ospringe, entertained the whole of their workmen to supper, to celebrate the recent marriage of Mr. Harry Whiting, the junior partner of the firm. The church of 8. Mary, Birmingham, was reopened on Sunday last, after redecoration. The cost of the work is £600. Messrs. Newbold, of Birmingham, were the contractors. Why not try the scene-, Srtercommunication, —e QUESTIONS. (2588.]—Strength of Floors.—Kindly state the probable weight per yard to be sustained by a floor bearing looms (9 ewt. each still) when in full action. Also, give a simple method of ascertaining the strength and sustaining pewer of a floor adequate for the aboye- mentioned.—Luminovus, [2589.|—Roofing.—What are the disadvantages arising from the employment of De Lorme’s system of roofing ?—A CARPENTER. (2590.]—Strength of Girders. — If Captain Seddon, R.E., or any of your readers will further explain the formula for ascertaining the weight cast- iron girders will carry as given on page 434 (second column) of the BurrD1ING News, also price and publisher of Baker’s book on “The Strength of Columns, Beams, and Arches,” I shall feel obliged.— De Me [2591.]—Foundations.—Can experience be given relative to the construction of buildings on boggy or otherwise defective soil? Would it be consonant with safety to lay in footings in stiff sand 18in. below the surface, having a layer of concrete or wide landings beneath them, notwithstanding the fact that a layer of bog or quicksand, or both, existed at a depth of 6ft. or 7{t. from the surface ?—OLp Moe. (2592.|—Colouring Portland Cement. — If umber or Indian red be mixed with Portland cement for outside wall-surfaces, will the colour run down in streaks after a@ shower of rain? If so, is there any method or material for mixing which will prevent it ? What material is used for making the moulds for stamping patterns ona cement surface, and when is the stamping done ?—CoLourist. [2593.]—Architectural Publication Society. —Can you or some one inform me what is doing in the matter of completing the Architectural Dictionary ? I begin to despair of seeing anything more of it.—Z. REPLIES. (2582.|—Necessary Implements,—A complete set of mathematical or drawing instruments, pins, T and set squares, pencils, pens, paper, boards, curyes, colours, brushes, centrolineads, straight edges, and the like, usually appertain to the office. Opinions and regulations are very diyerse.—F. (2587.|—The Human Figure.—M. le Duce gives the following as the way in which the sculptors of the Middle Ages found the principal parts of the human figure: The height A B or C D of the figure is divided into seven equal parts. The uppermost part is given to the head and neck. The breadth of the shoulders a b is two-ninths of the whole height. From a b A cn Aa
Bb 0 f through the point E, which halves the whole height, draw the lines af, be, joingeandgf The dotted line bh gives the length of the upper part of thearm, The height of the knee ison the lineiz, The length of the foot is equal to five-ninths of a part. Neither this method nor that mentioned in the query could very well be applied to the figure of the Discobulus, because some parts of the body are foreshortened.—P. E.
