, 1875-01-23
THE COURTHOUSE,
Mr. Tilley Again States III,
Claims.
Moro Literature on the Snbleet NJ
Implied Contracts.
Tho Conference Adjourns for d
Week.

The Commissioners Of tho Hoard at puhr,
Works aud tho budding Comn,itteo Ut ua
| County Board hold another conIorcnco yerto.
day, rclativo to tho proposed City-IIall Al,
Court-llo',Be, Commissioner rrindlglo n,.,
Ridcd, and there nore present Ateesrs, WalI
Burt'ck, Ciough, Gutntlor, scl,rn,dt, and Lo'
nerCan.
Tho Chairman supposed there WAS really 1;ff.
to do hsnce Mother tbs Council nor the Count,
Bohrd had tnkcn any action In regard to ID.
report of the Joint Committee.
mr. CIouch called attention to the follogino
coMxUSIcATloN FROM mn. T11LEy,
which Nns read Ivy tho Chairman:
After recaI't'slating tho action taken by Ii,
city aud county In 1929. lle says:
hy nc aforcaail ncton Of ahc c ,uuty mud o.,
lsnrd, became tho arc!ttTt kc'ectca by tlo civ ~
Gaity H'aru to surrtttead tho erection Of tie n1s
tue new Court ionsot ahoukl haye Rn,,c oil ami ~
iarod M ths WORKING drawings and Layo .nl,e~,tenisd
or ortnance ccntraut viii tho civ or COUNTY Sn
~onla i.I hays e., heen tn st;h cssa entitled 10.
t,a, nMf1r .n the preliminary t'ds general lra.
nsa, ~ atechSasous. ~ per cent on tho tstl1asd
Steena.1For ID Ssi detsea arnwlne. ana detailed sr,,
Third-For s.,icsintrrdenco Z pcr rent nalitia
hays already furnished tits preliminary Et1Irt ~
eoai oI, sassnS. md and tic fly s
ttnn OK ny plan ~ pcr cent npon tie estimated ce,t
mud by tho aas1e act Of adoption there arose ~"
| AN 1MiL1ED CONTRACT
that should enperned the erection Ut lAc bui]ain,
and fnrnlhh tho further drawings, etc. 5
II tfe s chs s,t3 and co1gy e M
7idaals, they arc liable for dansaA for 90 doing,
| -. HOSE / CHAPMAN.
q tlcaso resolved Thnt tho plans re.etea s ~ !,
h1essrs noso ohsp1aan for general design Of u,s
ted ~ t4ir1t
iRy tho SAINT ~ thu resolutions Of the City and 5n
y Boards adopting my plan Eu,cka n" md wiihont
Mcssrs noss Chapman becaino tho architects Of t.,
west wtuE Of tho CourttIouse, and nupcrinteicd t,
ersction In fact this adoption ii tho plans" ia ths
! Ing with architects. -@N -S1''-sE
To show your Committee Whit
THE UNDERSTANDING OF ARCHITECTS
OF this city is on the points involved, md what III,
usage and practice is in such cases. submit hrs
ith the .nsvsE of some thirty archscs to question:
viii that sustained ~ tue psoieasou IL i r,
roataon Which have taken In fact, the County Al.
CoEparation counse;' admits tho liability when l..
places tho Of tbs city and county mpon til,
sn slasna ~ t s I'D I'd. county 0"sa
&. s5ts 591 G,s csunty ss ~; ,1on tat
Tho p.an upon whirh to build tho Cuurt-IIoune mi
City Hall. Like resolution. also adoiteJ Is t.,
Common Council about ths sanle time 1nasH,1lb a.
tho city End county, At that tine, owned tlo
nnrSka plan, Do not lhlak either has incurred .ay
II It had 3een ths understanding Of architects th,
the eity mud county, by paying the prcniun, ocTs
for the Lest l., bera1e owners If the plsns o ua
La!ave That they would have had dozen tlaus nfrrei
know tint j would ncvrr have struck liue o.
married OIL Ql2n iu h,ch CHG.
GeSTESD
that tho city md county arc now under contract viii.
me to bHiid the Colrt-Ioga aecprlinx to ms l1t mi
under my supcziltendcues: coutsstct ,ua.n in ia
uRuat form Of such cotrncts to wit: by ,.u ntlpt,u
Of pla furnished ut teir solicitation subject to th
iniissa condition that, Il ny Ia1s shoul r adopted
would le resonpcuscd 10. nv st,ors al thu ns,in ts
OF a'cttects N tue absence Of any special agreement
as to cn1nr nation.
ing the rescluug of tic tuint resolutions Of tue ,iy
a,ld county above referred to, lcc, 1t tEt ths ypa
ths liability Of tie aty and eonn.y to me l,y re,
tlls past action of their respective boards. l.apec
fully. TuoMAs TtL1Gr,
THE AECurTEcTs.
Tho following accompanied tho commuplca.
10 dc ArrhHxets u Eatraao. Ns.:
a. dENttEnEs: Will yon 81 ne tue favor to
TaoxAa rrl11Y.
Q.--When competition, by advertisement. Is in7tea
for plans for buding aud przc4 rset,ps prc o.:
fersd for the three best 4 Il tho understanding
architectural profession that the corporation Or ,ulsea
inviting the competition sni offering snell r1ifrs
ceme4 tho owner Of .ueh plans receive preaiuusos
q
FerttFemont to that oIect7 A,-So,
o.-Wneu competition Is i'.yitsd for rian, nf aal
Try. and the owner Of the lond which tls bui'li,
Ii 10 erected adopts of tho pians submitted al tLs
one which he will bui1d by, is Ii the understanding:
the architectural profession that tho architect Wiz
drew thg raan adopted becomes employed nrehtt
to superintend Tie erection Of ths building, au fur,
nita the necessary plnns for the orsetion by such
Q.--WoulA ynus answer 10 tho 11at question bc H.
tered or any ttinercat II premium, was offered and
paid for such adupied tlans7 A.-No.
Tho architects who returned tho auawers giyea
wero O. L. Whoslock, J. NJ. Van Ostlet, c. T.
Thom as, c. @. Miller. G. Il. Clarke, William
Thomas T. D. Hamilton, D. ". Hll!ard, ". H.
Drake, ]. II. Edbrookc, l.. G. Welch, G. Btsest
". 4. Baker, A. Kirkland, ". ]. Edbrooke, g.
M.Randoiph, orcas Cobb. NJ. L. Beers, Cas-,
Chapman, @. W. Lalng, J. Frazoe, o, q. Smith
W. W, Boyngton, William Longhurst, Fritz
Foltz, ]. A. Treat, John Tuliy, O. II. plaqey, J.
B. Corlics and W. g. Corlies.
CosM1ss1oNEa nunDIcR
did not supposo the paper could he made sub.
jcct Of discussion, but tllexe was ono point iu Il
which eeerned to him would 20 considerably
agninst tho whoto reasoning. It waa stated sha.
after the plans wore nsked for. and ono adopted.
, contract wRs to be entered into between tEa
city aud tho architect. 1t waH evident that that
had not bean carried ont; but the claim wan thas
1t bad been by Implication. That he thought
initiated g&lnat the argument.
THE CHAIRMAN
stated that his recollection Of the matter wis
that, In oil the conversations with nil tho arch
tec.a who CAME before tho COMMITTEES to explain
their plaus, IT WAS understood that any plans
which were chosen AZ the prizo plans were the
Property Of tho city and county as soon ~ the!
More adoptad and tho premiunis paia,-thst
their adoption did not carry NTH 1t tho employ
nlent of tho architect; tho expressions uaed be.
ing to tho effect that the county and city hAa
the right to choose whom thoy pleasod to CARR
out any PLAN and although the chances wste
that ths usual rule would ba followed, aud the
person who furnished the sdopted plan bs ths
cue to suporintend the erection OF tho build
lng, provided the cost Vas reasonable. After
tho plans wora adopted, Honos Of the architects
fl.e waa not sure whether Mr. Tiliey wss ons
but kne" Mr. Mat2 and 51r. Gay eAilod}, cstns
fur what was called tho perspective" which,
they said, Tie city and county had no claim OF,
anco 1t belonged to them. That was oorrect, be.
canse one Of tho provisions OF the advertisement
was that no perspective should be furnished
and theY had aHked permission 10 laHdi It up Elta