Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-01-07

The construction of public buildings in diff
ferent parts Of the country necessitated by the
growth and constantly increasing business is a
favorite subject Of discussion by architects gen.
orally. Considerable objection is found in the
| present system, whereby the design and plans
of these buildings is confined to the taste and
| professional skill Of one man with numerous
other responsibilities engrossing his attention
at the same time. The supervising architect Of
the treasury is charged with the CONSTRUCTION Of
nearly all the public buildings authorized by
| Congress, and their architectural appearance
depends almost entirely upon his individual
ideas on the subject, governed. Of course. by
( the purposes to which the building is to be
devoted. the limit of it's cost and the character
istics of its location and surroundings.
COMPETITION URGED.
1t is broadly asserted by the opponents Of
| this system that no one man should be expected
to put the stamp Of his individuality into so
many OF our public buildings and that much
better results would be obtained il the work of
designing these national monuments was thrown
open to general competition, so that the gov
eminent could have the benefit Of the knowi-
edge of all and the opportunity of selecting the
best design in each case. The proposition has
been indorsed by majority Of the architects
who have filed the government Office having
!
yet succeeded in bringing the matter to the
favorable consideration Of Congress.
Mr.. W. j. Edbrooke, supervising architect of
the treasury, devotes chapter to this subject
In his last annual report to the Secretary of
the Treasury which has lust come from the
printer, and at the same time makes a general
defense of the architectural features of public
buildings in the United States compared with
the buildings erected by other countries. He
says:
Mr.. EDBRooxB's SUGGESTIONS.
In reference to the question of securing
plans and specifications for public buildings
through competition by architects there Is no
way, in my opinion, that would insure anything
like satisfactory results and benefit to the gov
eminent BY such method, unless by legislation
giving the Secretary Of the Treasury discre-
tionary power restricted to invite only lin
tied number OF members Of the architectural
profession, who citizens of the United
States and members of some recognized archi-
tectural association selected by reason Of their
acknowledged architectural genius ability and
skill. TO submit sketch plans for some Of the
larger buildings. suggesting the architectural
design and treatment of the buildings and
leaving the entire balance Of the work OF pre-
pairing the working drawings and specifications
and all matters pertaining to the awards Of
contracts and the supervision of the work Of
constructing the buildings to be done through
the Office of the supervising architect under the
system which has prevailed with such substan-
tlal and satisfactory results for many years past
and which Is now in vogue.
CNDEsERvEp CRITICISMS.
In my report for the year ending September
80, 1891, stated that prior to my appointment
as supervising architect there was some oppor-
tunity for me to become familiar with the fact
that unfavorable comments and criticisms of
the technical work and business of this Office
we're frequently made. but after entering upon
the duties of the position / also had abundant
opportunity for discovering the fact To how
unjust and undeserved such criticisms and
comments we're, &c.
In view of the statements and criticisms
which have continued to be made, and some of
them under such circumstances and surround
ings rs to give them the Appearance Ito those per-
sons who are not familiar with the facts in the
case and who are not correctly informed) of be-
ing based upon facts and statistical informa-
ton, In regard to the cost and the architectural
character OF the buildings erected under the
direction Of this office. deem 1t proper that /
should ut least make brief statement in be-
half of the work of this Office, which the facts
Of record will fully sustain.
1t mas been stated, in effect, that the cost of
the public buildings erected under the direc-
tions of this office largely exceeds the cost of
buildings erected by private parties or for
state and municipal purposes, and that the
public buildings are inferior in architectural
design and treatment to state, municipal and
private buildings and fail to show constant
progress in construction, equipment and artistic
expression, 81.
Such statements and criticisms cannot be
supported by facts and statistical inforr1atiou
EXCELLENCE AND COST OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS.
As to the cost Of public buildings, in COM
parison with buildings erected by state and
municipal authorities or private parties, the
records of this office positively sustain the
statement that the per cubic foot cost of first
class construction of public buildings, during
its present administration. at least has in the
general average been less and in many iDdivid
usl cases much less than structures of similar
character and magnitude erected for state,
municipal aud private purposes.
AS to the comparative excellence of arch
itectural design, treatment. artistic quality and
expression. structural economics, &c, in public
buildings erected under the direction OF this
office With those erected by foreign govern
ments, by state and municipal authorities or
by private individuals, IL must of necessity
appear that there can be no equitable basis of
comparison in cases wherein the constituent
parts, or the factors of consideration, are en-
tire!y dissimiiar.
Every one who is acquainted with even the
primary facts in the case knows that under the
law a public building must be erected COM
plete within the limit Of cost prescribed and
must be of sufficient size, that is. providing
sufficient floor and furnishing the interior
arrangements and facilities to meet the pur-
poses and needs of the several branches Of the
public service for which they are authorized
and erected, and that frequently the prescribed
limits OF cost result from calculations that are
not based upon data furnished from this Office
but altogether upon q conjecturai or exper-
mental basis, which Was SO fully explained in
nv last report.
In many cases. after the limits of cost have
been prescribed, it becomes necessary to sub