making itself of great value to the profession. Everyone wanted to know in what form the result of the investigation would be sent out, and offers of assistance and co-operation were received from innumerable sources.
On the whole the results of the discussions at Nashville were exceedingly helpful, and will un
doubtedly help spur on the Post-War Committee to carry on its formidable task during the coming year with renewed energy. Its greatest hope must be that it may be able to help in the development of a public opinion within the profession as to the lines along which the practice of architecture ought to grow so as to become efficient in the public service.
The Registration of Architects
Remarks by D. Everett Waid, Treasurer, American Institute of Architects, before the Nashville Convention
T
HIS subject is a matter of present importance for the reason that perhaps a dozen States now have registration bills under consideration, and double that number are likely to pass such laws in the near future. For the good of the public and the credit of the profession, it is the duty of every Institute member to be prepared to oppose every bill drawn on a wrong basis and to be ready to fight for certain fundamentals which, if not provided, would mean the defeat of every State law proposed.
Our chief danger lies in the fact that selfish selfprotection is the impelling motive most certain to initiate registration or license laws. Architects chafe when they see incompetent, conscienceless persons design buildings and impose on the public and the qualified practitioner by calling themselves architects and walking away with the commissions.
The first impulse is to say “bar such people by means of a license law.” Such a method of meeting competition is a mistake and in the end brings trouble. As members of the American Institute of Architects, we should have the vision to work on a higher plane; we should have the foresight and energy to take the lead and act first, and not wait until we have to correct the missteps of others.
Our primary motive and object should be to make ourselves competent rather than to condemn the incompetence of others. A registration law should be an instrument for educating architects, not for placing a ban on a poor carpenter or an enigneer who wishes to design a building. Druggists or practical nurses may advise a remedy for a cold; but they cannot call themselves doctors without first passing examinations which test their actual qualifications. A real estate man may give a sound opinion on a legal question or conduct his own legal operations, but he has no standing in court until he has acquired certain general and technical education and experience.
A professional man or an artist must excel in his particular line of work and be a real expert as compared with the laity or those in other professions, or he will bring discredit upon himself and the profession of which he pretends to be a qualified member.
Let us impress upon ourselves and every architect the fact that each State in the Union is going to have a registration law. That being the case, whether we feel any personal interest in registration laws or not (at any rate it should be an unselfish interest) let every member of the Institute stand for three things:
First—that every architect to win his title should have a general education equal to or a little better than that of the average well educated citizen, plus an adequate technical education.
Second—That present practitioners may continue to practice by legal right and that the Board of Examiners shall not be forced to give them certificates of competency unless they prove their qualifications.
Third—That all the States shall aim at some uniformity of standards and to that end all prospective legislation be submitted through The Octagon to the Institute Committee on Registration.
Since the last convention a new kind of legislation has been evolved. That is joint registration of architects and engineers. Three States have formulated bills of this kind: Ohio, Indiana and Michigan, and others are likely to follow, creating Boards of Examiners and Registration made up of members of both professions. In one State the bill provides for a board of examiners made up of one architect and two engineers. Think of the architectural standards of a State being placed in the hands of one architect, doubtless a political appointee, a mining engineer and an electrical engineer !
The American Institute of Architects has declared
in favor of association with engineers on a basis
On the whole the results of the discussions at Nashville were exceedingly helpful, and will un
doubtedly help spur on the Post-War Committee to carry on its formidable task during the coming year with renewed energy. Its greatest hope must be that it may be able to help in the development of a public opinion within the profession as to the lines along which the practice of architecture ought to grow so as to become efficient in the public service.
The Registration of Architects
Remarks by D. Everett Waid, Treasurer, American Institute of Architects, before the Nashville Convention
T
HIS subject is a matter of present importance for the reason that perhaps a dozen States now have registration bills under consideration, and double that number are likely to pass such laws in the near future. For the good of the public and the credit of the profession, it is the duty of every Institute member to be prepared to oppose every bill drawn on a wrong basis and to be ready to fight for certain fundamentals which, if not provided, would mean the defeat of every State law proposed.
Our chief danger lies in the fact that selfish selfprotection is the impelling motive most certain to initiate registration or license laws. Architects chafe when they see incompetent, conscienceless persons design buildings and impose on the public and the qualified practitioner by calling themselves architects and walking away with the commissions.
The first impulse is to say “bar such people by means of a license law.” Such a method of meeting competition is a mistake and in the end brings trouble. As members of the American Institute of Architects, we should have the vision to work on a higher plane; we should have the foresight and energy to take the lead and act first, and not wait until we have to correct the missteps of others.
Our primary motive and object should be to make ourselves competent rather than to condemn the incompetence of others. A registration law should be an instrument for educating architects, not for placing a ban on a poor carpenter or an enigneer who wishes to design a building. Druggists or practical nurses may advise a remedy for a cold; but they cannot call themselves doctors without first passing examinations which test their actual qualifications. A real estate man may give a sound opinion on a legal question or conduct his own legal operations, but he has no standing in court until he has acquired certain general and technical education and experience.
A professional man or an artist must excel in his particular line of work and be a real expert as compared with the laity or those in other professions, or he will bring discredit upon himself and the profession of which he pretends to be a qualified member.
Let us impress upon ourselves and every architect the fact that each State in the Union is going to have a registration law. That being the case, whether we feel any personal interest in registration laws or not (at any rate it should be an unselfish interest) let every member of the Institute stand for three things:
First—that every architect to win his title should have a general education equal to or a little better than that of the average well educated citizen, plus an adequate technical education.
Second—That present practitioners may continue to practice by legal right and that the Board of Examiners shall not be forced to give them certificates of competency unless they prove their qualifications.
Third—That all the States shall aim at some uniformity of standards and to that end all prospective legislation be submitted through The Octagon to the Institute Committee on Registration.
Since the last convention a new kind of legislation has been evolved. That is joint registration of architects and engineers. Three States have formulated bills of this kind: Ohio, Indiana and Michigan, and others are likely to follow, creating Boards of Examiners and Registration made up of members of both professions. In one State the bill provides for a board of examiners made up of one architect and two engineers. Think of the architectural standards of a State being placed in the hands of one architect, doubtless a political appointee, a mining engineer and an electrical engineer !
The American Institute of Architects has declared
in favor of association with engineers on a basis