The American Architect and Building News.
Vol. XXXII.
Copyright, 1891, by Ticknor & Company, Boston, Mass.
No. 797.
Entered at the Post-Office at Boston as second-class matter.
APRIL 4, 1891.
Summary: —
A Book Department. — Civil Service in its Application to the Office of the Supervising Architect. —The Timber-framed Buildings of East Anglia. — Half-timber Construction in this Country. — Baron Haussmann’s Work. — Railroad
Building in Asia Minor............................................................... 1
French Architecture. — I....................................................................3 A Run through Spain. — IX. ............................................................5 Letter erom Paris..................................................................................................8 Letter from London............................................................................13 Illustrations: —
House of Samuel K. Ward, Esq., 1608 K St., Washington, D. C. — Flats for J. Caldwell, Jr., Louisville, Ky. — Church of the Sacred Heart of Saint Mary, Detroit, Mich. — Cottages at Buchanan, Va. — Church for the Bethlehem Presbyterian Society, St. Paul, Minn. — The Charlesgate Apartment-house, Boston, Mass.
Additional: Monument to the Grand Admiral Gaspard Coligny, Paris, France. — Plan, Section and Details of the Same:
Four Plates. —Organ, St. Sepulchre’s, Holborn. — Window, Dorchester Cemetery Chapel. — Memorial Window. —
Houses in Beckenham Park, Beckenham, Kent.........................14
Books and Papers...................................... 15 Communications: —
Chimneys. —The Auditorium Tower..............................................15 Notes and Clippings.............................................................................16 Trade Surveys.......................................................................................16
W
E are, of course, always willing to give our subscribers any information in our power as to the book or books which may aid them in prosecuting their studies or investigations. At the same time, it is much easier to ask than to answer a question, and we often have to spend a good deal of time in hunting through catalogues and libraries. Moreover, the same questions are asked and answered again and again, and so, perhaps, use for the benefit of a single questioner an unjustifiable amount of our space. To cure these slight evils, we have established a department for book advertisements — which will be found elsewhere in this issue — and we hope that before writing to us for assistance, those who stand in need of a book will examine this list carefully — and then write for it, not to us, but direct to the firm who advertises it. We believe that our subscribers will find this new department of use, and we know that publishers stand ready to expand it to many times its present volume if they find that architects wish to procure books in this way.
THE New York Times says that there is trouble in getting competent assistants in the office of the Supervising
Architect at Washington, and that, apparently, with the idea of rendering the task more easy, a regulation was passed by Congress, just before the adjournment, exempting the office from the operation of the Civil Service Act, so that the Supervising Architect can appoint any one he likes. It will be remembered that a great uproar was raised during Mr. Freret’s term, about the Civil Service examination for a few vacancies in his office. The disappointed candidates, or the newspapers for them, protested that one man’s brain could not hold all the knowledge they were expected to possess; and, in point of fact, no one passed the examination, although we do not remember seeing any of the questions quoted which appeared to us beyond the reach of human intelligence. Now, however, it appears that not only qualified candidates, but candidates of any sort, are lacking, and that the Supervising Architect is compelled to put up with inferior assistance, because he cannot, for the salaries which the Government is willing to pay, get such men as a private architect would employ for such work. As it has been demonstrated officially, over and over again, that the cost of the architectural work on the Government buildings, under the present system, is greater, in some instances very much greater, than if it were done by private architects, as it is everywhere else in the world, and according to present accounts, the work is worse done, we should think it would occur to some one besides the architects, who know it well enough, but do not like to be conspicuous in calling attention
to it, that it is about time to put a stop to the practice. The fact is that the Supervising Architect’s office has no reason for existing, and ought to have been abolished long ago. It is generally supposed to have been instituted, in the corrupt period which followed the war, to serve under a thin veil of plausibility, as a political agency. Under the faithful and upright direction of the men who have administered it, the expectation that it could be used for such a purpose has been disappointed, and under the more wholesome conditions which now exist at Washington, there is no probability that it can ever be used as a means of corruption. Meanwhile, however, it pursues its ponderous way, grinding out its mediocre designs, and filling the country with public buildings which have not the slightest artistic interest, or even superior merit of arrangement, while, if the ordinary practice of civilized countries had been followed for the last twenty years, we should by this time have had nearly every important town in the United States adorned with a masterpiece of the best work that American architects are capable of, and should, besides, have saved many million dollars.
M
R. JOHN S. CORDER recently read before the Leeds and Yorkshire Architectural Society a very interesting paper on the “ Timber-framed Buildings of East Anglia. ” We all know something of the appearance of the old English timber-houses, but very few people, even in England, know much about their history, and Mr. Corder’s information is not only valuable, but new to most of us. According to him, all the timber-framed buildings in the East of England were erected during the fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, that is, during the reigns of the later Plantagenets, the Tudors and Stuarts. All, or nearly ail of them, it appears, belonged to merchants, or their guilds or companies, or to religious institutions. As in modern days in this country, the frame of the timber-houses with which our ancestors were familiar, rested on a sill, often of large size, — a foot square or so, which was laid on the rubble foundation, the angles being halved or framed and pinned. Originally, all the timbers of the framing were visible outside, and the sill was often moulded on the exterior, so as to form an ornamented plinth. The sill was mortised for the studs, which were often seven or eight inches wide on the face, and were set eight or nine inches apart, making the spaces between, them nearly of the same width as the timbers themselves. Just below the second floor, the studs were framed into what we should call a girt. At points where a particularly heavy timber above was to be supported, a thicker stud was set, which was usually moulded on the inside, and carved on the outside, or formed like a pilaster. All the posts appear to have been cut off by the girt, the cornerposts not running through the next story as they would with us. The second-story beams rested on the girt, and projected over it from one foot and a half to two feet, carrying at their outer end a sill, on which rested the studs of the next story. These carried another girt, and the next tier of beams projected again in the same way. The walls of the upper stories were braced with curved timbers, halved upon the studs and pinned. When the frame was up, the intervals between the studs were filled-in with a mixture of clay and chopped straw, plastered on a sort of basket-work panel, of willow twigs woven together, fitted into the spaces between the timbers, which were often previously grooved to receive it. After the clay was hard, the panel was finished by plastering it with lime-mortar, mixed with clay, on both sides, flush with the studding; and ornamental figures were often drawn in the fresh mortar, and decorated with color. This construction was then known as “ post and panel work. ” The filling between the timbers, of lime mortar on a clay foundation, was likely to swell and decay if it should get soaked with water, and for this reason each story was made to shelter the one below it, by the projection characteristic of the style. This explanation is, we believe, new, but it seems extremely reasonable. Mr. Corder acknowledges that, in city houses, greater space was obtained for chambers, without encroaching on the street, by the projection of the stories, hut he observes that the same projection was used on nearly all half-timbered houses in the conntry, where plenty of room was available, so that he believes that the constructional reason was the more important one, and in this most architects will agree with him.
Vol. XXXII.
Copyright, 1891, by Ticknor & Company, Boston, Mass.
No. 797.
Entered at the Post-Office at Boston as second-class matter.
APRIL 4, 1891.
Summary: —
A Book Department. — Civil Service in its Application to the Office of the Supervising Architect. —The Timber-framed Buildings of East Anglia. — Half-timber Construction in this Country. — Baron Haussmann’s Work. — Railroad
Building in Asia Minor............................................................... 1
French Architecture. — I....................................................................3 A Run through Spain. — IX. ............................................................5 Letter erom Paris..................................................................................................8 Letter from London............................................................................13 Illustrations: —
House of Samuel K. Ward, Esq., 1608 K St., Washington, D. C. — Flats for J. Caldwell, Jr., Louisville, Ky. — Church of the Sacred Heart of Saint Mary, Detroit, Mich. — Cottages at Buchanan, Va. — Church for the Bethlehem Presbyterian Society, St. Paul, Minn. — The Charlesgate Apartment-house, Boston, Mass.
Additional: Monument to the Grand Admiral Gaspard Coligny, Paris, France. — Plan, Section and Details of the Same:
Four Plates. —Organ, St. Sepulchre’s, Holborn. — Window, Dorchester Cemetery Chapel. — Memorial Window. —
Houses in Beckenham Park, Beckenham, Kent.........................14
Books and Papers...................................... 15 Communications: —
Chimneys. —The Auditorium Tower..............................................15 Notes and Clippings.............................................................................16 Trade Surveys.......................................................................................16
W
E are, of course, always willing to give our subscribers any information in our power as to the book or books which may aid them in prosecuting their studies or investigations. At the same time, it is much easier to ask than to answer a question, and we often have to spend a good deal of time in hunting through catalogues and libraries. Moreover, the same questions are asked and answered again and again, and so, perhaps, use for the benefit of a single questioner an unjustifiable amount of our space. To cure these slight evils, we have established a department for book advertisements — which will be found elsewhere in this issue — and we hope that before writing to us for assistance, those who stand in need of a book will examine this list carefully — and then write for it, not to us, but direct to the firm who advertises it. We believe that our subscribers will find this new department of use, and we know that publishers stand ready to expand it to many times its present volume if they find that architects wish to procure books in this way.
THE New York Times says that there is trouble in getting competent assistants in the office of the Supervising
Architect at Washington, and that, apparently, with the idea of rendering the task more easy, a regulation was passed by Congress, just before the adjournment, exempting the office from the operation of the Civil Service Act, so that the Supervising Architect can appoint any one he likes. It will be remembered that a great uproar was raised during Mr. Freret’s term, about the Civil Service examination for a few vacancies in his office. The disappointed candidates, or the newspapers for them, protested that one man’s brain could not hold all the knowledge they were expected to possess; and, in point of fact, no one passed the examination, although we do not remember seeing any of the questions quoted which appeared to us beyond the reach of human intelligence. Now, however, it appears that not only qualified candidates, but candidates of any sort, are lacking, and that the Supervising Architect is compelled to put up with inferior assistance, because he cannot, for the salaries which the Government is willing to pay, get such men as a private architect would employ for such work. As it has been demonstrated officially, over and over again, that the cost of the architectural work on the Government buildings, under the present system, is greater, in some instances very much greater, than if it were done by private architects, as it is everywhere else in the world, and according to present accounts, the work is worse done, we should think it would occur to some one besides the architects, who know it well enough, but do not like to be conspicuous in calling attention
to it, that it is about time to put a stop to the practice. The fact is that the Supervising Architect’s office has no reason for existing, and ought to have been abolished long ago. It is generally supposed to have been instituted, in the corrupt period which followed the war, to serve under a thin veil of plausibility, as a political agency. Under the faithful and upright direction of the men who have administered it, the expectation that it could be used for such a purpose has been disappointed, and under the more wholesome conditions which now exist at Washington, there is no probability that it can ever be used as a means of corruption. Meanwhile, however, it pursues its ponderous way, grinding out its mediocre designs, and filling the country with public buildings which have not the slightest artistic interest, or even superior merit of arrangement, while, if the ordinary practice of civilized countries had been followed for the last twenty years, we should by this time have had nearly every important town in the United States adorned with a masterpiece of the best work that American architects are capable of, and should, besides, have saved many million dollars.
M
R. JOHN S. CORDER recently read before the Leeds and Yorkshire Architectural Society a very interesting paper on the “ Timber-framed Buildings of East Anglia. ” We all know something of the appearance of the old English timber-houses, but very few people, even in England, know much about their history, and Mr. Corder’s information is not only valuable, but new to most of us. According to him, all the timber-framed buildings in the East of England were erected during the fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, that is, during the reigns of the later Plantagenets, the Tudors and Stuarts. All, or nearly ail of them, it appears, belonged to merchants, or their guilds or companies, or to religious institutions. As in modern days in this country, the frame of the timber-houses with which our ancestors were familiar, rested on a sill, often of large size, — a foot square or so, which was laid on the rubble foundation, the angles being halved or framed and pinned. Originally, all the timbers of the framing were visible outside, and the sill was often moulded on the exterior, so as to form an ornamented plinth. The sill was mortised for the studs, which were often seven or eight inches wide on the face, and were set eight or nine inches apart, making the spaces between, them nearly of the same width as the timbers themselves. Just below the second floor, the studs were framed into what we should call a girt. At points where a particularly heavy timber above was to be supported, a thicker stud was set, which was usually moulded on the inside, and carved on the outside, or formed like a pilaster. All the posts appear to have been cut off by the girt, the cornerposts not running through the next story as they would with us. The second-story beams rested on the girt, and projected over it from one foot and a half to two feet, carrying at their outer end a sill, on which rested the studs of the next story. These carried another girt, and the next tier of beams projected again in the same way. The walls of the upper stories were braced with curved timbers, halved upon the studs and pinned. When the frame was up, the intervals between the studs were filled-in with a mixture of clay and chopped straw, plastered on a sort of basket-work panel, of willow twigs woven together, fitted into the spaces between the timbers, which were often previously grooved to receive it. After the clay was hard, the panel was finished by plastering it with lime-mortar, mixed with clay, on both sides, flush with the studding; and ornamental figures were often drawn in the fresh mortar, and decorated with color. This construction was then known as “ post and panel work. ” The filling between the timbers, of lime mortar on a clay foundation, was likely to swell and decay if it should get soaked with water, and for this reason each story was made to shelter the one below it, by the projection characteristic of the style. This explanation is, we believe, new, but it seems extremely reasonable. Mr. Corder acknowledges that, in city houses, greater space was obtained for chambers, without encroaching on the street, by the projection of the stories, hut he observes that the same projection was used on nearly all half-timbered houses in the conntry, where plenty of room was available, so that he believes that the constructional reason was the more important one, and in this most architects will agree with him.