The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1911-06-24

sure that he cannot be blamed because
he has not permitted himself to be unduly
swerved therefrom by the personal taste
or idiosyncrasy Of any one.
In conclusion Mr.. La Farge's partner
gives the chronology OF the recent up
heaval:
Mr.. La Fargo left New York on the eve
ming OF May 81. On June 7 Nr. Grams letter
addressed 10 Mr.. la Fargo arrived and
cont ned the Information that he had been
IN negotiation with the trustees since
May -. on June wrote Mr.. Cram mott
flying him Of Mr. La Farae's absence the
date Of his probable return and requested
him "a a matter Of ordinary professional
, courtesy TO refrain from any furth her neso-
tiations with the trust ees until Mr.. La
, Farge's return
Mr.. Grams reply to this letter was not
received until the morning Of June ~. and
was such that informed him that any a, =
temp, on hi- part TO displace Mr.. la Fargo
or TO enter into negotiations with the tr'is-
tees during his absence would appear 10
me to be an unprofessional proceeding
and that his statement that his frat propo-
si'ion TO the trustees provided explicitly
f, for the association of Mr.. La Fargo with
he cathedral worn did not permit him
with propriety 10 enter into any negotia-
'ions whatever with them without hrst
consulting with MIR La Fargo. that such was
my idea OF one OF the cardinal principles
, OF pfofe ssional practice. and that IL ap-
peared 10 be 50 considered by such dis
| tinvuishrd members OF the profession as
| had consulted
! | pointed oui that Mr. La Fargo did no,
| leave New York until after business hours
/ on May n. and thai be ween May ~ and the
! time OF his departure there had been ample
time 10 communicate with him. as he had
been regularly at his once and could he
| reached by any ordinary means
! Mr. cram. as quoted in one OF the papers
/ has stated that hc put the facts before the
! National Chapter of the American Insti-
/ uta IN Washington and consulted friends
! IN the profession lie said they all tod
J him his position was unassaiIsble. and he
will accept the Offer with the reservation
noted above. Further he states tha,
! Legally and professionally there was nc
reason for my refusing TO accept the posi-
tion
Further. In reply letter came from Mr.
Morris. his partner. saving that he had
sailed three diys before for Europe
Further. Il have laid all these facts before
the American Institute Of Architects. a.
we'll a. several prominent architects, They
have all told me | was justified.
| Regarding the alleged statement from
me, | would say that ! did not advise Mr.
Cram that nv partner had sailed thvee
days before for Europe As matter oi
! fact. when FIRST wrote to MIR. Cram, he had
been gone ak days. A. to the statement
that he had laid the facts before severa
prominent architects. who all told him he
was Justified. MIR. Cram must have forgot.
ten certain correspondence which he has
had very recently with prominent archi.
tects in this city and in Boston. which cor
respondence could in no manner he inter.
preted as expressing approval from a pro.
fessionai point of view; in fact the meaning
intended TO be conveyed was quite tbs
contrary.
The unsolicited comments which have
been made TO me concerning this situation
by fellow members Of my profession were
! not in commendation OF his action.