Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1894-03-12
Treasury officials Point Out Defects
in the New Law.
FROM THE ARCHITECTS STANDPOINT
The Effort Made to Improve Public
Architecture.
BOTH SIDES PRES ENTED

| IT is said at the Treasury Department
that there is no disposition whatever to an
tagonize the desire of Congress for an i'm
proved architecture in public buildings
and That the only reason why the statute
providing for open competition in the de-
signing ana planning of such works has not
been enforced is because of the conviction
that enforcement of the law in its present
shape is impracticable. Although it pro-
woes that the Secretary of the Treasury
shall invite architects to submit designs for
public buildings, it fails to provide any
method for the selection of the connecting
architects. He is told to select not less
imam hve architects to prepare plans for
each building. The trouble is as to the
manner OF selection. Shall he be governed
| by the wishes of the Senators of the state
the Representatives from the district, the
governor of the state. the mayor of the city
the chamber Of commerce, the local political
organization. the Individual citizens or the
Institute of American Architects?
They will all have views on the subject
and the chances are that no two Of them
will agree. The result will, it is claimed
be tremendous pressure from all sides
So that it will be practically impossible for
anyone not personally acquainted with all
the architects to make a proper selection.
|
| method of passing on the merits of the
| respective plans. The Secretary cannot be
| expected to have complete technical
| knowledge of architecture or even a gem
| eral knowledge on the subject sufficient
| to tell which of the many plans submitted
| is really the best for the purpose required.
| Then the law is singularly vague as to
| Where the work of the successful COM
| petlng architect ends and that of the gov
| eminent architect begins. The former pre-
pares the designs, draws up the specifica-
| lions and has supervision of construction,
| while the latter is held to a strict account
| ability Tor all expenditures in connection
| Herewith.
| The responsibility for the work, from the
design to the completion Of tie building, is.
| say some of the treasury authorities, mixed
SO badly that 1t is difficult to tell ANYTHING
about 1t. The usual course in such matters
is for the architect who makes the design
to arrange all the details and to carry them
out. In this bill, however, the treasury
architect is held accountable for the dis
bursement of the appropriation and at the
same time is practically debarred from all
| supervision of the work for which he is to
pay. Another objection to the bin is that il
VIII add greatly to the expense of the work
Inc organization of the treasury architects
once Will have to be continued to make IL
/ effective and all the other expenses of de-
signing and supervising will be extra.
| another important matter left unprovid-
eu ior ny the bill Is as to how the sites of
the buildings shall be selected. Shall the
site be selected with a view TO arcnitsctu-
raj effect and shall the competing archi-
tects have voice in determining the ques-
| ton! The physical characteristics of The
| site Will have an important bearing on the
! design for the building. Therefor. u NAV
| be urged that the architects should prorer-
ly be permitted to determine the matter OF
| site.
1t therefore appears that the Secretary of
| the Treasury objects to the bill in !ts pres
| etlt form on the grounds that It is eXpen-
slVe, indefinite in its methods anu virtually
1 alnDraGtlC4hla N - 70,
! stood that the Secretary will ask that The
law De amended so TO specify hcw the
competing architects shall be selected and
| TO limit their functions to the urepar,iInn
| OF plans and Specifications leaving the ex
| ecution OF the work entirely under the su-
| perVislon OF the government architect.
The Other Side.
When the attention Of Mr. Joseph G.
Hornblower. a prominent member of the
American Institute of Architects, which
| secured the passage of the law providing
| for competition in designing public build
| ings. was called to the view taken by the
Treasury Department by a Star reporter
| he said:
The present law is purposely not ex-
plicit in detailing the mode OF selecting
architects for public buildings and as to
the mode of Carrying on the work after
such selection.
1T was deemed most wise to leave such
| of the Treasury and his advisory officer
the supervising architect
These two gentlemen are as capable of
directing such details as any committee of
congress, and they have power to devise
the best course perfectly unhampered by
ill-considered restrictions.
The architects OF the country simply
ask TO have the custom established of
going outside of the Treasury Depart
ment for designs of important buildings
that our public architecture may become
representative of our best work
mo other great country expects an ex-
ecutive officer of the government to de-
sign its public buildings, but considers
such buildings as monuments to be care
fully considered before assuming form for
perpetuation down the centuries.
who should he invited to compete?
The supervising architect knows the men
who could, with fairness to the goyern-
ment, be invited.
How to Conduct the Competitions.
'It seems to me-" contin ded Mr. Horn
blower, 'it would be an excell-at plan to
conduct the competitions under the direc-
ton of the supervising architect, aided by
the advice of the executive committee of
the American Institute of Architects.
This committee has the confidence Of the
profession and is composed of Sucl men as
Mr.. Kendall. Mr.. Hunt, Mr.. Post, Mr.. Nc
Kim, Mr.. Burnham, Mr.. Aldermen &C
customed to work on a large scale and 20
deal with contracts involving kun ireds Of
thousands and millions of dollars, and men
who produce work worth the cost and wor-
thy of the day.
This committee would lend its services
in furtherance of the end without cost TO
the government.
1T could appoint a subcommittee 10 act
for the department in any given case, and
relieve the Secretary of embarrassment in
the choice of competitors.
Mr.. Burnham, practically alone, leeig-
mated the architects of the chief buildings
for the Chicago exposition, AMI his juds-
ment has met with nothing but commenda- |
ton.
such committee as before suggested |
with the supervising architect. could Ge-
eide upon designs to be adopted or srchi- |
tects to be appointed.
Easy to Do.
1.-THE carrying out Of the work is simple |
No contract can be made and no work ac- |
cepted without the approval of the super |
vising architect.
THE designer of the building must super |
wise the construction as 1t progresses, to |
determine that his designs are carried out. |
The treasury architect must inspect il to |
see that the government gets what it con-
tracts for.
Il cannot see any insurmountable diff |
Guilty in these details.
The objection is made that this mode of |
carrying on governmental work will adj to /
n DC Tor 60