The Portland daily press., 1889-03-19
THAT BOSTON ARcHITEcT.
He Has Built No State House and
May Never Build One.

the following report of debate in the Mas
sachusetts House of Representatives, over
the plans which Messrs. Bridgham q Spof-
ford and others presented in the competition
Tor plans Tor the extension of the Massa-
chusetts State House. As Mr.. Spofford is
the architect whose advice was followed In
the late proceedings at Augusta and upon
whose estimates the majority Of the legisla-
ture made their appropriation for the exten-
sion of the Maine Capitol, IL may be of in
terest TO see to just what extent his firm are
likely to be the architects of the Massachu-
setts capitol:
"The House resolve authorizing the Gov
ernor and Council to procure assistance In
perfecting plan for the better accommoda-
tlon OF the State Government, and also relia-
bic estimates OF the cost of construction, was
considered next. Mr.. Tucker Of Norfolk ex-
planned the purpose Of the resolve, In reply
to Messrs. Sym0nds and Clark Of Essex, and
stated, in reply to Mr.. Symonds. that he did
not know whether or not the entire control
OF the revision was to be given by the Gov
ernor and Council to the firm of architects
that won the first prize. a-4 7-
'Mr. Symonds then spoke in opposition to
appropriating $500 under this resolve. He
said, in answer to questions from the floor,
that the rst:prize men had placed. as a mat
tef oi necessity, IN order to acquire the prize,
an additional story upon the Stata House,
covering 10 or II rooms beyond what were
called for by the specifications and involving
the State In an expenditure of $4,000 or
$4,000. Neither Of the other architects
who won prizes went beyond tire specifca-
tions, but the favored men had drawn the
first prize In the lottery because they had
gone away beyond the restrictions which
were placed upon them by those who had
the power. The Commonwealth Of Massa-
chusetts, In the the magnanimity Of its heart,
has given to these men $1,000 in order to ask
for $500 more to perfect their improvement,
ne SAID. The hrst prize had been $500, he
continued, and $500 was called for to per-
fect the plans which had gained 1t. A State
but he was In favor of wiping out Of exist
ence the present condition and building
something that was worthy of the Common
wealth. He was not in favor of building at
the rear OF the State House for the benefit Of
the departments Of the Commonwealth and
leaving the committees to work In 'the mis-
cradle holes" where they had to sit today.
Ii any Of the prize plans commended itself to
his consideration 1t was plan No. 2, which
provided for what would be a fitting edifice
for tne State, he opposed the passage Of the
pending resolve.
"Mr. Kingsley Of Middlesex said that
$500 had been offered as premium for State
House plans, which were to belong to the
Commonwealth. The first was given for the
best one sumitted. but all the three prize
plans contained good points. 1t was now
desired, under the pending resolve, to con-
centrate the good points of the three plans
in one plan which should be acceptable In
all respects. also to have detailed working
plans made upon which an estimate for pre-
sentation to the legislature could be made.
That was very simple and very proper
thing TO do. 1t had not been said or inti-
mated, added Mr.. Kingsley in reply to ques-
tions, that the parties whose plans were ac-
cepted should have charge Of the work.
"Mr. Gum of Suffolk submitted that all
the documents connected with this matter
specified building for department purposes
State House annex, to be connected with
the present building. He also submitted
that all the architects had had equal oppor-
tupities for inquiry before making their
plans, and defended the action that the Gov
ernor and Council had taken.
"Mr. Sprague Of Suffolk thought that the
| Governor and Council had erred, II they had
| erred at all, In not offering enough for the
| first, second and third prize plans. But moi
one OF the prize plans was found to be en-
tirely satisfactory and 1t was desired to make
| from the three and from other ideas a plan
| which would be so. 1t Is important, said he
that II We are going to carry out what was
begun last year, we should have plan wei
fitted for the purposes Of the State for 25 and
| 80 years to come. 1t can only be done by
taking those plans and getting one plar
| which shall have the benefits of all.
"Mr. Tucker Of Norfolk moved to amend
the resolve so that the Governor and Coun
| ell should procure plan and estimates and
| report to the legislature IN March or April
| Mr.. Dwinell Of Middlesex moved to max.
| ths date April 10, and Mr.. Tucker accepted
this. Mr.. Symonds wanted to have the iant
west = to Joy street taken and a building
| opposed absolutely to anything else.
The Dwinell amendment was adopted
| and the resolve was ordered to third read
ing. Under suspension Of the rules, moved
oy MT; Symonds, by agreement with the
| crossed and sent to the House for concur
| renee In the amendment"
| The American Architect of Jan. 18th, als6
| contains an article which shows the condi
tions under which Messrs. Brigham & Spot
| ford won their prize for plans (plans which
| have not yet been adopted. This article Il
headed "a General Protest against Improper
Conditions Of Competition" and is as fol
lows:
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has, b,
stats Hons 1N aayersed LOT designs Tor th
nished In open competition. The conditions 0
the competition. as announced, have eyidentl
tom IN the conduct of such matters the sole en-
| and aim Of which should be to secure TO the Stat
the pest service by making sure that "the bes
| men shall take part; that they shall be encoul
| aged TO do their best; that the best they offe
shall be selected; and that the author OF the sue
cessful design shall be employed as architect. pre-
| yided the building Is built and he Is competent.
The conditions announced are faulty
First-In that they are not drawn up In accord
| anCo with the DeSt custom, ana no ASSURANCE !
| given that an expert adviser will be employed .
| aid the commission In their choice.
| Seoond-That no assurance is given that tn
| successful competitor will be employed, but, o.
the contrary, II is distinctly stated that all prem
| lated competitors are TO relinquish all ownershi
in their plans to the State, without any furthe
claim to compensation or employment.
| Thrd-Even II the first prize In the competition
were as 1t should be, the execution OF the build
ing, the actual prizes offered would still be entire
ly insufficient compensation TO the authors OF tn
drawings placed second and third.
| For the above reasons, we, the Undersigned al
| chitects, citizens OF the State OF Massaehuseti
land elsewherel. protest against this form OF con
petition, which, In our opinion, Is not for the bes
interests OF the State or OF our profession, and W
| therefore decline to enter IL.
To this remonstrance are signed the name
of Al firms of Boston, nearly. II not ever
leading architect of that city, an
with them are Joined leading architects Q
the principal cities of the country.
So II seems that the Boston architect VIII
was hearalded as lone who had earned tn
right to speak" had earned that right IN
contest which the leading Boston architect
did not enter. But even In that contest b
firm seems to have won prize mot the cor
tract by making plans Of a building tins
wsuld cost quarter of a million more tina
the Massachusetts people want TO pay.