The American Architect and Building News.
Vol. XXXII.
Copyright, 1891, by Ticknor & Company, Boston, Mass.
No. 799.
Entered at the Post-Office at Boston as second-class matter.
APRIL 18, 1891.
Summary: —
The Office of Supervising Architect to the Treasury Depart
ment. — Appointment of Mr. W. J. Edbrooke to be Supervising Architect. — Death of Mr. H. C. Burdett, Architect. — A Story concerning the Artist Whistler. — A large
Siamese Painting. — The Trans-Siberian Railway.........................33 French Architecture. — III........................................................................35 The Guelph Exhibition. — III....................................................................37 Letter from Paris..........................................................................................40 Notes from our Travelling-scholar....................................................41 Letter from London......................................................................................42 Letter from Canada........................................................................................ 44
Letter from Chicago.....................................................................................45 The McKim Fellowships at Columbia..................................................46 Illustrations: —
Houses on Walnut Street, Philadelphia, Pa. — Two Competitive Designs for the Board of Trade Building, Montreal, Canada. — Sketches by the American Architect Travellingscholar. — White National Bank and Safe Deposit, Fort Wayne, Ind. — Detail of the Rood-loft in the Church of St. Etienne Du Mont, Paris. — Rood-loft in the Church of St. Gommarius, Lierre, Belgium. — Apartment-house, Minneapolis, Minn. — Design for the Second Baptist Church, Danbury, Conn. — Furniture on Classic Lines.
Additional: The Rudolphinum, Prague, Austria. — Doorway of the Lichtenstein Palace, Vienna, Austria. — The Baptistery, Florence. — Churchyard Wall, Hockerell, Bishop’s Stortford, Eng. — The Grey College, Bloemfontein, Orange
Free State, South Africa......................................................................46 Societies................................................................................................................47 Communications: —
Greek Sculptors. — Books on Stone-cutting. — Switchback Railways. — The American Architect Travelling-Scholarship. — Suggestions as to Illustrations. — To Draw an Ellipse. —
The New York Cathedral Competition.............................................47 Notes and Clippings........................................................................................48 Trade Surveys...................................................................................................48
THE New York Times, in speaking of the resignation of Mr. Windrim, expresses itself very strongly in favor of
the abolition of the present system of designing Government buildings, and calls upon the architectural profession “ to force the subject upon the attention ” of Congress. Hitherto, architects, while they have often discussed in private the absurdities of Government architecture, have disliked to put themselves forward in urging a change which, while beneficial to the country, would also be of obvious advantage to their own profession; and the Conventions of the American Institute of Architects, in recognition of the demands made upon them, have always contented themselves with passing mild resolutions, usually commending some official expressions or suggestions coming from the Supervising Architects themselves, who, curiously enough, have been the most prominent and consistent advocates of the abolition of their own office. In the present temper of the public, an indication of which may be found in numerous editorials, agreeing with that of the Times, which have appeared in the daily papers, it seems to us that the profession would do a public service by putting itself vigorously forward in advocacy of a change, the importance of which, in the interest, not only of the advancement of American art, but of economy of the people’s money, it is best able to understand and explain. The Times editorial shows clearly that people who think anything about the subject suppose that the architects should naturally lead in the movement, and are waiting for them to do something about it, and that if they remain supine, no one else will do anything. As the sentiments of the Institute on the matter have already been several times put on record, all that is necessary now is to do something to give effect to those sentiments, by urging them, not on the thin air, in the form of Convention resolves, but on the people who have the power to make the change desired, that is, on the President, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Members of Congress, by means of a small and influential committee, appointed at once by the Executive Committee of the Institute, to confer with the
members of the Government, with a view to securing higher artistic merit, and greater economy and efficiency, in the designing and construction of the National buildings. The President of the Institute, whose name is as highly honored on the other side of the Atlantic as on this, should, of course, be a member of the committee, and might be depended upon for earnest and effective service, and, with two or four more members, armed with proper authority, could make the influence of the Institute felt in a most beneficial way. What the committee would recommend as a substitute for the present system would be best left to their discretion. The Times suggests a plan which is somewhat similar to one proposed in these columns some months ago. It says that “ the design of important public buildings should be determined either by competition under fair and attractive terms, or by the designation of local practitioners as Government architects for their several districts. ” We should prefer to modify this a little, by having the title of Government architect dependent, not on “ designation ” by the President, at the instance of Members of Congress, but on selection by experts, as a reward of professional attainment, to which all architects should be equally entitled to aspire. Moreover, instead of appointing one Government architect in a district, and giving him charge of all the public work in that district, the title should be, as it is abroad, bestowed upon all who have proved their claim to such distinction, and need carry with it nothing more than a certificate of qualification to carry out Government work. This would still be a professional advantage worth working for, even though, as often happens abroad, the possessor of the title may never be employed on any Government building. With us, however, it is worth considering whether Government competitions might not with advantage be restricted to architects who have earned the official title, and who have thereby been proved to be capable of carrying out with skill and success the commissions awarded them. The Government has not always been fortunate with architectural competitions open to all the world, and there is a strong feeling against them at Washington, which could be reconciled with the wishes of the public and the profession in some such way as this, to the advantage of every one. As to the Supervising Architect himself, the Times thinks he should remain, but as general supervisor, not as designer, and that his post should be made more comfortable, and his services should be better paid. There would probably be enough for him to do in consulting with the local architects, and approving contracts, but the costly and inefficient machinery of designers, assistant designers, computers, assistant computers, and so on, by which the Government designs have hitherto been ground out, has no excuse for existing, and should be cleared away without delay.
THE Secretary of the Treasury has chosen Mr. Edbrooke, of Chicago, Supervising Architect of the Treasury Department, to succeed Mr. Windrim. Mr. Edbrooke is an architect of much experience, and is said to have been strongly recommended by influential Members of Congress. Among the other candidates, Mr. Hornblower and Mr. Windom of Washington and Mr. T. Roney Williamson of Philadelphia, seem to have been the most prominent. Mr. Windom is, however, said to have modestly disclaimed any wish to occupy the office, and Mr. Hornblower whose selection would have been highly approved by the profession, labored under the disadvantage of being a resident of the District of Columbia, which deprived him of political backing. Mr. Williamson would have made a brilliant official and is said to have been recommended for appointment by Mr. Windrim, but he is a young man and without much reputation, as yet, outside the profession. We trust that Mr. Edbrooke will increase the honor which the incumbents have, of late years, done to an ill-paid and troublesome office. It is, by the way, rather strange that some of the daily papers do not notice how totally the fact that such good men can be had as Supervising Architects discredits the absurd tales which lately floated about the country in regard to professional incomes. The public was told, not long ago, and was inclined to believe, that prominent architects often earned one or two hundred thousand dollars a year, and that a thousand dollars a week was a common income for a city architect; yet Mr. Windrim and Mr. Williamson, who both rank, in reputation, in the profession, among the first dozen or so of the architects in the great
Vol. XXXII.
Copyright, 1891, by Ticknor & Company, Boston, Mass.
No. 799.
Entered at the Post-Office at Boston as second-class matter.
APRIL 18, 1891.
Summary: —
The Office of Supervising Architect to the Treasury Depart
ment. — Appointment of Mr. W. J. Edbrooke to be Supervising Architect. — Death of Mr. H. C. Burdett, Architect. — A Story concerning the Artist Whistler. — A large
Siamese Painting. — The Trans-Siberian Railway.........................33 French Architecture. — III........................................................................35 The Guelph Exhibition. — III....................................................................37 Letter from Paris..........................................................................................40 Notes from our Travelling-scholar....................................................41 Letter from London......................................................................................42 Letter from Canada........................................................................................ 44
Letter from Chicago.....................................................................................45 The McKim Fellowships at Columbia..................................................46 Illustrations: —
Houses on Walnut Street, Philadelphia, Pa. — Two Competitive Designs for the Board of Trade Building, Montreal, Canada. — Sketches by the American Architect Travellingscholar. — White National Bank and Safe Deposit, Fort Wayne, Ind. — Detail of the Rood-loft in the Church of St. Etienne Du Mont, Paris. — Rood-loft in the Church of St. Gommarius, Lierre, Belgium. — Apartment-house, Minneapolis, Minn. — Design for the Second Baptist Church, Danbury, Conn. — Furniture on Classic Lines.
Additional: The Rudolphinum, Prague, Austria. — Doorway of the Lichtenstein Palace, Vienna, Austria. — The Baptistery, Florence. — Churchyard Wall, Hockerell, Bishop’s Stortford, Eng. — The Grey College, Bloemfontein, Orange
Free State, South Africa......................................................................46 Societies................................................................................................................47 Communications: —
Greek Sculptors. — Books on Stone-cutting. — Switchback Railways. — The American Architect Travelling-Scholarship. — Suggestions as to Illustrations. — To Draw an Ellipse. —
The New York Cathedral Competition.............................................47 Notes and Clippings........................................................................................48 Trade Surveys...................................................................................................48
THE New York Times, in speaking of the resignation of Mr. Windrim, expresses itself very strongly in favor of
the abolition of the present system of designing Government buildings, and calls upon the architectural profession “ to force the subject upon the attention ” of Congress. Hitherto, architects, while they have often discussed in private the absurdities of Government architecture, have disliked to put themselves forward in urging a change which, while beneficial to the country, would also be of obvious advantage to their own profession; and the Conventions of the American Institute of Architects, in recognition of the demands made upon them, have always contented themselves with passing mild resolutions, usually commending some official expressions or suggestions coming from the Supervising Architects themselves, who, curiously enough, have been the most prominent and consistent advocates of the abolition of their own office. In the present temper of the public, an indication of which may be found in numerous editorials, agreeing with that of the Times, which have appeared in the daily papers, it seems to us that the profession would do a public service by putting itself vigorously forward in advocacy of a change, the importance of which, in the interest, not only of the advancement of American art, but of economy of the people’s money, it is best able to understand and explain. The Times editorial shows clearly that people who think anything about the subject suppose that the architects should naturally lead in the movement, and are waiting for them to do something about it, and that if they remain supine, no one else will do anything. As the sentiments of the Institute on the matter have already been several times put on record, all that is necessary now is to do something to give effect to those sentiments, by urging them, not on the thin air, in the form of Convention resolves, but on the people who have the power to make the change desired, that is, on the President, the Secretary of the Treasury, and the Members of Congress, by means of a small and influential committee, appointed at once by the Executive Committee of the Institute, to confer with the
members of the Government, with a view to securing higher artistic merit, and greater economy and efficiency, in the designing and construction of the National buildings. The President of the Institute, whose name is as highly honored on the other side of the Atlantic as on this, should, of course, be a member of the committee, and might be depended upon for earnest and effective service, and, with two or four more members, armed with proper authority, could make the influence of the Institute felt in a most beneficial way. What the committee would recommend as a substitute for the present system would be best left to their discretion. The Times suggests a plan which is somewhat similar to one proposed in these columns some months ago. It says that “ the design of important public buildings should be determined either by competition under fair and attractive terms, or by the designation of local practitioners as Government architects for their several districts. ” We should prefer to modify this a little, by having the title of Government architect dependent, not on “ designation ” by the President, at the instance of Members of Congress, but on selection by experts, as a reward of professional attainment, to which all architects should be equally entitled to aspire. Moreover, instead of appointing one Government architect in a district, and giving him charge of all the public work in that district, the title should be, as it is abroad, bestowed upon all who have proved their claim to such distinction, and need carry with it nothing more than a certificate of qualification to carry out Government work. This would still be a professional advantage worth working for, even though, as often happens abroad, the possessor of the title may never be employed on any Government building. With us, however, it is worth considering whether Government competitions might not with advantage be restricted to architects who have earned the official title, and who have thereby been proved to be capable of carrying out with skill and success the commissions awarded them. The Government has not always been fortunate with architectural competitions open to all the world, and there is a strong feeling against them at Washington, which could be reconciled with the wishes of the public and the profession in some such way as this, to the advantage of every one. As to the Supervising Architect himself, the Times thinks he should remain, but as general supervisor, not as designer, and that his post should be made more comfortable, and his services should be better paid. There would probably be enough for him to do in consulting with the local architects, and approving contracts, but the costly and inefficient machinery of designers, assistant designers, computers, assistant computers, and so on, by which the Government designs have hitherto been ground out, has no excuse for existing, and should be cleared away without delay.
THE Secretary of the Treasury has chosen Mr. Edbrooke, of Chicago, Supervising Architect of the Treasury Department, to succeed Mr. Windrim. Mr. Edbrooke is an architect of much experience, and is said to have been strongly recommended by influential Members of Congress. Among the other candidates, Mr. Hornblower and Mr. Windom of Washington and Mr. T. Roney Williamson of Philadelphia, seem to have been the most prominent. Mr. Windom is, however, said to have modestly disclaimed any wish to occupy the office, and Mr. Hornblower whose selection would have been highly approved by the profession, labored under the disadvantage of being a resident of the District of Columbia, which deprived him of political backing. Mr. Williamson would have made a brilliant official and is said to have been recommended for appointment by Mr. Windrim, but he is a young man and without much reputation, as yet, outside the profession. We trust that Mr. Edbrooke will increase the honor which the incumbents have, of late years, done to an ill-paid and troublesome office. It is, by the way, rather strange that some of the daily papers do not notice how totally the fact that such good men can be had as Supervising Architects discredits the absurd tales which lately floated about the country in regard to professional incomes. The public was told, not long ago, and was inclined to believe, that prominent architects often earned one or two hundred thousand dollars a year, and that a thousand dollars a week was a common income for a city architect; yet Mr. Windrim and Mr. Williamson, who both rank, in reputation, in the profession, among the first dozen or so of the architects in the great