Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1888-09-06

done would have been secured, even uader the
specifications - they stood, and the tower would
would have been TOO narrow for . really sub
stanttal and permanent structure.
TIE SPECIFICATIONS TOO GENERAL
In short, the specifications as to the tower ma
sonry at least were too general In their terms not
even distinguishing between the comparatively
dwarfed and lightly loaded church walls anc the
lofty, heavy, storm. beaten tower. They dwelt too
briefly upon the details pertaining to strength and
OF the contractor local building practice and the
specned supervision OF the architects The clause
that the ashiar SHAH "1e LAID up after the most
refer 10 the appearance 1t shall present to the eye
rather than 70 It's bond as an integral part OF the
struction OF the rubble or the ashlar masonry.
They contained nothing whatever to indicate how
or 10 what extent the work should be bonded, or
the sizes, shapes and distribution Of thorough or
other bond stones, or the kinds and frequency Of
anchors, clamps strap iron or other devices for
tying and knitting the work together.
THE WORKMANSHIP DIRECTIVE.
Even the specifications as they stood. however,
were not complied with by the builders, in several
particulars seriously affecting the strength of the
masonry. Thus the Iubble work was not "well
bonded, and the mortar did not contain "best
stones Of the SsSisS fali IN nroner sense the
specifications as to minimum thickness, depths
and heights. 1t Is true that considerable num-
Der measured somewhere within their ugly shapes
the full thickness required, but very rarely at the
points meant, namely, on the bed and build joints,
and In almost no instance on both In the same
stone. Inc stones averaged less than the mini
mum sizes, large number being mere sharp edged
slans difficult to secure well in place without iron
rubble backing. Tine specifications OF minimum
sizes Implied u go0dly number Of larger stones.
but these were almost entirely wanting. The
specifications TO use galvanized iron clamps,
wherever necessary or expedient to tie ashlar and
backing together" was also practically disre-
garded throughout.
Therefore, ynrI- xva npfS s6rof nlooo n
pest KIND nor performed In a thorough and work.
manllke manner" and Of course the contractor
"asreeaoly TO the specifications, In good work.
manilke and substantial manner" but did evil
dently 10 so Ito the entire satisfaction" although
not under sufficiently close and continuous
direction and supervision OF the architects" be-
cause the latter We're not exercised The deplor-
a0le results were due in great measure TO an
entire absence OF any continuous personal drec-
tion, supervision, or inspection by the architects,
their representatives, other than some occasional
OF some six weeks In the beginning the church
committee endeavOred to secure local Super1n-
tendence OF the work, but the architects natur-
any Oolected and positively refused 70 entertain
any such proposition, even to the extent OF timing
their visits or Inspection by any notice from the
an 6y ana sae w
letter OF the architects under date OF April 8,
1887, before work on the building had begun: ave
feel, however, That we cannot IN SO important
building as this take the responsibility (0f 'abso-
lutte control OF the building and worko without
using our own Judgment as to when and how
often we should visit IL, so we propose to make
such visits according to our Judgment, and the
committee can pay whatever portion OF our trav-
enns expenses Iney see ut: We had much rather
II Is entirely contrary to professional practice)
IMAM TO run the risk OF so Important building
mlscarrying." And so this arrangement has con-
tinued from the beginning to the present time.
THE WORK SHOULD HAVE BEEN WATCHED CONSTANT
LY By COMPETENT INSPECTOR
Masonry to be suitable for tower OF this kind,
and above all q rubble masonry, should have been
watched constantly by a competent inspector. In
one inspection when started on the concrete foot
ing, second when the water table had been
reached, third at few feet above the doorway
arches fourth when the tower was at half height,
and so on. The stone cutters, mortar makers and
masons had their own way the rest OF the time.
WHEN THE CRACKS APPEARED,
and as they increased the architects were sent for
and came and made examinations, which they re-
ported upon to the committee. Thus the following
resolution was sent to the architects on January
10 last: resolution was sent to the architects
by the building committee notifying them that
they had lie irned that the cement and mortar used
and in some oener respects the work had not been
carried on according to the provisions OF the con-
tract, and that 1t seemed to the committee that
these defects would not have occurred II there had
been proper supervision OF the work by the
architect
ON RESUMPTION OF WORK IN THE SPRING
the architects ex lmined and approved 1t, and al
lowed 1t to 60 ahead Correspondence regarding
the continued appearance and Increase Of the
cracks followed, together with some inspections by
the architects who, on June 9, when the work had
reached the oelrry stage, reported rhat there was
no danger that tue tower would certainly not fall
warning" and on June Is that they considered 1t
safe to proceed slowly with the tower, and to finish
IL according 10 the original plan except. perhaps
In the matter OF the heavy stone cornce al the top
and the heavy tile termination for which lighter
material may be used to lessen the weight" From
this time until the fail they relied on Information,
at short intervals from the contractor, that the
cracks were not Increasing much and there was no
cause for alarm.
THE FAULTY DESIGNS
Thus, In brief, It appears that the architects
design Of the foundation walls and specifications
for the construction OF the tower were faulty:
that, largely for want OF the Intelligent supervi-
sion required OF the architects, the contractors
materials and workmanship were inferior and up-
suitable and that therefore the beautiful tower
tell. The manner OF Its fall and its complete re-
duetion 70 a solid heap Of small stones and
thoroughly disntregate mortar, showed its
general weakness 50 plainly that the wonder was
not that II fell, but rather that 1t had stood SO
In form and dimensions the design Of the tower
furnishes thoroughly substantial and perma-
nent structure, needing but the simplest kinds OF
good materials and workmanship for its proper
erection. There is no reason on this score why 1t
should not be at once restored Its proper con.
struction involves no unusual difficulity or ex
pense. It's height Is but moderate, Tor there are
numerous entire buildings or equal height in the
large cities. The remaining walls OF the church
were, OF course, built In the same defective man
ner as the tower, more pains being taken with their
exterior appearance than their strength. Being
very low. and comparatively thick, however, and
carrying but little weight except their own, we
cannot say that they are not perfectly safe but we
recommend an examination at q few points. to
fully put their condition beyond question.
THE LACK OF CONSTANT INSPECTION
In view OF the fact that the building Ipspec-
tor Of the District Is a member Of the Commission
and in the absence OF further or more specific ip,
structloas as TO the form OF this report your COM
mission request that they be relieved from express
ing their views US 10 the efficiency completeness
OF the official Inspections
We have laid considerable stress upon the lack OF
constant inspection and supervision, but as all ex.
perienced and thoroughly practical architects and
engineers well know, It Is absolutely tndispens-
able 10 good workmanship. A large proportion OF
contractors and workmen do not apprehend the
and In these days OF haste and close
composition, are 100 often disposed to
slight and "jerry II" to such an extent
as 10 rob factors OF safety OF such of their value
The factor OF safety then becomes the factor OF
careiesSnesS or OF dishonesty and such needs to
nothing In building Is more abused and carelessly
manipulated than the mortar, and yet 1t Is most
important material Good work should be more
generally insisted by the architects and careless
mechanics discouraged.
The accompanying four photographs exhibit the
different times during the removal OF the debris
and especially the interior OF the tower foundation
walls. This report has been necessarily DELAYED
10 await the disclosure OF the foundation walls for
exanlnatloI.and some statements OF the architects
Very respectfully, &C.