78 eee See eeeeeeSSeeeeeeeeeeTw ooo THE BUILDING NEWS. Jan. 26, 1872.
WORCESTER SCHOOL BOARD SCHOOLS COMPETITION. Srr,—Following please find copy of protest which has been lodged by me against the decision of the Wor- cester School Board, by which they placed Mr. E. A. Day, of Worcester, with motto ‘De die” first, and myself, with motto, the arms, and ‘‘No Extras,” second, in competition for their schools. As the reception of the drawings after advertised date is an unheard-of proceeding, which, if allowed to pass unchallenged, will operate most seriously against every member of the profession, I politely request every architect, whether a competitor or not, to at once write me to London address an endorsement of my protest, as I consider in acting as Iam doing I do as much in the interest of the profession generally as for my own benefit. The next ordinary meeting of the Board takes place on Thursday, February Ist, and letters posted Wed- nesday will reach me in Worcester. As I consider the matter one of vital interest to us all, I trust you will find room for a copy of the protest and such extracts from this letter and comments of your own as you may think the importance of the case necessitates.—I am, &c., W. Secku aM WITHERINGTON. 135, Cheapside, E.C., Jan. 23, 1872.
Copy of Advertisement which appeared in the ‘ Worces- tershire Chronicle” of Nov. 8, 1871, and many other papers. To ARcHrITECTS.—EXTENSION OF TrME.—The time allowed to architects to send in plans for the erection of school buildings, as advertised in the Worcestershire Chronicle of Oct. 25th, is, by order of the Board, ex- tended from Noy. 30 to Dec. 31, 1871.—F. Marcus, Clerk to the Worcester School Board,
Copy of Protest. Srr,—Havying received intimation that your Board have placed Mr. E. A. Day first in the school compe- tition, and have awarded the premium of £30 to my- self, I beg respectfully to enter the following protest against Mr. Day’s plans being carried out :— 1. The motto “De die” is a palpable play upon his own name. 2. That two or three days previous to the 30th, being extremely pressed for time, I sent to Mr. Mareus (the secretary) to say that as the 31st (the day named in the advertisement for sending in the drawings) fell upon the Sunday, I should be glad to know when plans were to be delivered. The answer returned was, plans must be delivered before the 31st. 8. On Saturday, the 30th, I sent to the Guildhall to know what was the latest hour for the delivery of the plans, and the answer was 5 o'clock to-day ; and although any extension of time would have been invaluable to me, my plans were deposited before that hour. 4. Though this information was given Officially, of My own personal knowledge IT know that Mr. Day’s plans were not delivered on Saturday, whilst I have positive proof that his drawings did not leave his office till after 8 o'clock on Monday night, the 1st instant, at which hour if would be only reasonable to suppose the Guildhall offices were closed. 5. I need not say the great principle of all competi- tions is a certain time of delivery for all, and I am confident that it will be only necessary for me to ex- plain to you and your committee these facts (of which you have, of course, been hitherto ignorant) to ensure that justice shall be done to me, and Mr, Day’s plans disqualified. T may say that a copy of this letter has been sent to each member of the Board, and a somewhat similar one to your secretary. Thanking you and your committee most respectfully for the honour you have done me, I have the honour to be, yours most obediently, W. SECKHAM WITHERINGTON. G. W. Hastings, Esq., Chairman Worcester School Board, Jan. 19, 1872. P.S.—May I be allowed to ask that an early meeting of the Board be called to take into consideration my just objections, which I am fully prepared to prove by incontestible evidence, and in consequence I feel my- self called upon to return both the drawings and cheque when received wider protest and without prejudice. Vent. ath. Copy of endorsement of my protest forwarded to the Chair- manby Mr. Henry Haddon, of Me Malvern and Hereford, whose design, Idoneum,” was third, DEAR Srr,—Mr. Witherington has shown me a copy ofthe protest he has entered against the decision of your Board in regard to the acceptance of Mr. E. A. Day’s design. As one of the competitors under the motto “Tdoneum,” I beg to say that I endorse Mr. Wither- ington’s views of the matter, believing his statements to be correct, and that Mr. Day’s design is disqualified for the reasons set forth, whether regarded from a business or from an honourable point of view.—I am, Sir, yours very truly, Henry Happon. Great Malvern, Jan. 20, 1872.
G. W. Hastings, Esq., Chairman, Worcester School Board, Jan, 20, 1872. srs, Haddon Bros., of
Memoranda.
Following is a statement of comparative cost :—
Mr. Day, exclusive of fittings ... £4,020 0 0
Mr. Witherington, ditto ........ 3,525
697 Difference,......seccecanecsnes 0 0 Equal 21 per cent. in favour of Mr. Witherington. Mr. Day, exclusive of fittings ... £4,020 0 0 Mr. Witherington, inclusiveditto 3,563 10 0 456 10 0 Equal 13 per cent. in favour of Mr, W., and yet IT give every accommodation asked for by the instructions, whereas a great point of merit in Mr. Day’s design is considered the arrangement of a Board-room and clerk’s-room, whereas the Secretary distinetly told me, in reply to the query, none were to be provided. Tt will be seen that if Mr. Day’s fittings are added at same cost as mine, there is a balance of 21 percent. in my favour, and yet mine is no fancy estimate, but was prepared by Messrs. Wood & Sons, who are amongst the first contractors of the Midland Counties. Difference...... ...cseeessesee (Mr. Fergusson recently threw out a taunt that the Royal Institute of British Architects was a mere trades union. <A trades union, to be successful, requires an amount of virtue among its members which is not always found among architects. In a trades union an offence offered to one member is resented by all, and resented at all hazards. The men cling together like well-cemented bricks, and rise or fall together. They sometimes submit to extraordinary hardships, such as living on bread and water for weary month after weary month, so that the cause of the union may triumph. Now, we are no thick-and-thin “adyoeates of trades unions, because they frequently abuse the power they possess. But no one can deny that the members composing these unions are, as a rule, animated by courage, resignation, and a spirit of abnegation of self. The individual member sinks his own interests in what he supposes is the common good. Now, if architects, who generally look down with such supreme contempt on working men, would in compe- titions imitate working men, they would fare better and win more respect. Trade unionists act for the benefit of the body. One man does not take an adyan- tage of another man, neither will he permit the employer to do so if he can help it. But in competi- tions, architects too often disregard all considerations of corporate benefit and the honour of the craft, and act from individual impulse for individual benefit. We need not in this note quote instances to prove this, as every one acquainted with ordinary competitions ad- mits it. We do not say that all architects are tarred with the same brush. There are many high-minded men who would scorn to take a mean advantage to win in a competition. On the other hand, in almost every com- petiton there are men who will resort to the most questionable artifices to win; and very frequently cor- porations or committees wink at such artifices, and the result is injustice. Now, we do not wish to see archi- tects form themselves into a national trades union ; but we think they may act more fairly than they now fre- quently do towards each other. Mr. W. Seckham Witherington, in the above correspondence, appeals to the architects of the country to ‘endorse his pro- test,” and no doubt many will do so. But what good will such endorsement effect? He cannot, with any endorsement he may receive, alter the decision of the committee, and dispossess Mr. Day without legal power, and we certainly do not recommend law, as in the majority of cases the lawyers are the only men who benefit from litigation. Would it not be more mag- nanimous for Mr. Day to say, ‘‘I have no desire to take advantage of a brother architect, and if he thinks he has been wronged or the honour of the profession compromised, I will submit the matter for the reconsideration of the School Board Committee, to be decided by them on its merits without bias or prejudice of any kind, or to the arbitration of any man who may be mutually appointed’? Such action would allay irritation, inspire confidence, raise archi- tects in public estimation, and become a useful prece- dent.—Ep.] Str,—We are told in a legitimate competition of thirty-six designs, the successful two are Messrs. Day and itherington, both Worcester men, the former to carry out his design, and the latter is awarded the £30 premium. The first is an old resident, and the other his friends have resided some time there. Upon this selection it appears to me to be only the old dodge again, each competitor securing as much influence as he possibly could, and then securing the job by way of his friends. Again, we are told that the Board arrived at this decision without the professional aid of an experienced architect. According to the report of the Birmingham Gazette, the cost of the first design is estimated at £4,020, the schools to accommodate 700 scholars—nearly £5 15s, perhead. Surely to select two Worcester men appears to me to be very “fishy,” and the Board might have saved the other thirty-four the expense, trouble, and waste of time in competing.—I am, &c., A CoMPETITOR,
‘ . PLUMBING. Srr,—Your correspondent ‘ Plumber ” has mis- understood me. I never intended two siphons on one pipe; my letter says nothing of the kind, and no one with the slightest knowledge of hydrostatics would think of doing so. It is evident from ‘t Plumber's ” last sketches that he does not understand the metal valves mentioned by “G. H. G.” I will apply them to his sketch, Fig. 3, page 59: L being valve open to allow water to pass from H, and M yalve closed, preventing water being drawn from trap of I. Iccannot see the great objection “Plumber” raises to these valves. Houses are not built to suit the plumber’s work, and in many cases the air-pipe he has shown would be impossible, and in others the cure would be worse than the disease. Why not add his testimony to the bad qualities of pan closets, as he has done to the Dtrap? A word to him and the writer of the series of articles on “Plumbing,” ‘Do not indulge in local terms.” I should never have guessed that jaw-box meant sink, and with- out the sketches should not have understood “rhone *”” to mean * half-round eaves gutter.”"—I am, &c., CLERK OF WORKS.
NEW WAY OF GETTING UP A COMPETITION. Srr,—In your paper of the 29th ult., an observation was made by your correspondent respecting a new church for the Calvinistic Methodists, Liverpool. The committee having advertised for a church already made in a cireuit of forty miles from Liverpool, which they would go and see, I suppose their intention was to copy all found good from each, and make one for themselves from all this mixed information got on the cheap. But judge their happy surprise ; instead of receiving replies, sending the committee on visits to all parts of Lancashire to see these model churches, it appears they received but very few invitations; but» instead of that they have received heaps of plans, not merely sketches or’ old plans of some already-erected, but complete sets of plans, elevations, &c., all highly coloured and shaded, and that from several of the leading architects of the town, and from other neigh- bourhoods as well, several certainly from young men, but the majority from leading men, and among them conspicuously the President of the Liver- pool Architectural Society, and of course, each specifying the merit of his own article, and this simple committee has quite an imposing competition, without a promise of one farthing premium to even the best. They are neither bound morally nor legally. And as for architects to talk about the expectations and ill- treatment of the pnblic, and speaking in their meet- ings and through the press about the rules and condi- tions laid down by the Institute,and endorsed by their local associations, the least said about it the better. It strikes me that no other profession would condescend to such proceedings as the above, and seldom has there been such competition among tradesmen to supply 2 union workhouse with potatoes and milk, as what there has occurred in this case. —LOOKER-ON,
MR. SHARPE ON THE HOLY SEPULCHRE. Srr,—I have not a word to say upon Mr. Sharpe’s strictures of Mr. Fergusson’s criticisms on Mr. Street's design for the New Law Courts; but, inter alia, Mr. Sharpe refers to the Holy Sepulchre and its site in a way which, to those interested in the subject, calls for further information. Mr. Sharpe observes, p. 58, ‘that he (Mr. Fergusson) pronounced the mosque of Omar,
in defiance of all ancient and modern evidence, to be 9”
the true site of the Holy Sepulchre.” Now I beg to
say that I both possess a copy of Mr. Fergusson’s
“The Holy Sepulchre and the Temple at Jerusalem,”
and that I think very highly of it. Further, having
been lately engaged in certain historical investigations,
T have found that both * ancient and modern evidence,”
as well as popular belief, are often founded upon igno-
rance, forgery, and imposition. Consequently the
question that rises to my mind in this ease is, has Mr.
Sharpe discovered, or is he able to point to real eyi-
dence, that the site of the so-called “‘ Mosque ofOmar ”
is not the site of the Holy Sepulchre, or what was
supposed to be its site in Constantine’s time; and,
further, can Mr, Sharpe prove where its real site is ?—
I am, &c., VERITAS.
DRAIN-PIPES AND PRESSURE OF GAS IN DRAINS. Str,—In my letter at page 59there are three mis- prints. In second line, for page 457,” read “45,” and in thirty-sixth line for “old” read “ald; and in second last line for page * 415," read **485,"—Iam, &e,, PLUMBER. ———_>———- Tur Orrern or Frres.—Mr. A. A. Croll has put forward a suggestion respecting the origin of fires, which may possibly account for some of these disasters, and which, at any rate, is deserving of investigation. His theory is that the rust from iron pipes may, under certain circumstances, absorb oxygen so rapidly as to become suddenly red-hot, and that if the particles are present in sufficient quantity, a temperature far beyond the ignitable point of dry timber will be produced. The simple remedy is, of course, the coating of the iron pipes with a safe covering, or the removal of them from contact with wood.
