The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1889-11-07
THE JOINT BUILDING PLANS.
Some Suggestions as to How They Should be
Submitted.
10th Editor of THE HERALD.

the Editor of THE HERALD.
In a recent issue of your paper appeared a
communication over the signature of Carroll s.
iicrns, architects, presenting some suggestions
on vhe subject Of the prizes that should be
offered in connection with the proposed compe-
5lton in respect to plans for the proposed city
nall and court house building.
Permit me to endorse the suggestion of your
correspondent TO the effect that instead OF the
committee conducting the competition IN queS
ton, restricting the prizes offered to two as at
present announced, the supervision Of the In
tended buildings with the usual allowance OF
percentage on the cost Of the work, should De
given 10 the designer OF the plans selected for
adoption; the two money prizes now offered TO
be glNtn respectively 10 the producers OF tne
second and third best plans. BY this method
without extra cost to either the city Or the
County-throe prizes would be offered instead OF
twO and not only taS your correspondents nave
already suggested) would higher order OF tai
eat be enlisted in the competition, but greater
justice be done to a number OF competitors WHO
arc expected to perform 50 Inuch laDor WIN 30
little chance OF getting anything for their pains.
Anyway the plan, recommended Is the precls e
one that was adopted by the committee OF TIE
chamber of commerce in respect to their build
ing and one which gave general satisfaction
IN respect TO a question proposed by your cor
respondents for consideration by the committee
namely: AS to whether the competing archl-
tects should be requested to attach nom de
plume instead of their real names 70 their draw
Ings, q few words should be said. the real pur-
pose Of the nom de plume OF course, Is 10 con
ceal the identity OF the persons preparing Jhe
various plans, with view 10 avoiding OluS or
personal favor in the awardment OF the prizes.
This omingly fair method, ls,howeYeron close
inspection, seen to be one of the shallowest
pieCeS Of prctenSe in behalf OF fairness which
Intelligent committeeman were ever deceived
by, for the simple reason that absolute secrecy
as TO the authorship Of the various plans neceS-
Sary to constitute the nom de plume measure
Of any value cannot be had in one case out OF a
COEen.
The first consideration which vitiates the sup
posed secrecy of the nom de plume, is the fact
that the 1ces of competing, as much as other
architects are more or less visited
every day by friends and patrons,
as well as by anxious contractors eager to
learn all particulars respecting buildings OF I'M
portance for which drawings are being prepared.
Under these circumstances, unless competition
dawingS prepared In u cellar the peculiar
characteristics Ct all such designs are bound to
ne made known sufficiently TO be recognizable
when placed on exhibition and pointed out Us
the work OF this that or the other architect.
But visitors TO architects offices are not the
only ones who communicate facts of this kind.
Architects very freQu sntly do so themselves.
Committees conducting competitions of this
kind usually impose no other condition on the
architects than that each competitor shall re-
train from attaching his real name to his draw
jngs The conscientious architect Of course
feels bound in honor to not only.to This much.
but to conceal the authorship OF his plans from
the knowledge of the committee in every other
way. If he carries into execution this very
while he is keeping himself o1t OF the way of the
committee, others are not only person
ally but through the agency OF friends
impresSng on the minds of the committee in
every possible way the superiority Of their plans
frequently with very successful results to them
selves In my opinion this farcical method OF
c0-Arcti4g architectural competitions should
not be permitted The only possible object to
be obtained by the use of the nom dc plume is
the avoidance of partially on the part of the
committee and this is exactly what is not ac-
c0mplished. Absolute secrecy rs to the author
ship of plans cannot be maintained among
resident architects. The only result of such
regulation IS to cripple the architect who en-
dcavors TO carry out such a requisitiOn in good
faith, while it affords opportunities TO the IN
Scrupuous to get ahead Of their more truthful
rivals.
The real measure needed 10 be enforced and
very greatly needed too, Is, that any competing
architect known to personally interview mem
bers of the committee, during the period that
plans are under their consideration, other than
when Officially requCStedto do so for the purpose
of giving necessary information, should have
his name stricken from the list Of competitors,
Respectfully
Il 7. n HARRTSOS Architect