The American Architect and Building News.
Vol. XXXII.Copyright, 1891, by Ticknor & Company, Boston, Mass.
No. 802.
Entered at the Post-Office at Boston as second-class matter.
May 9, 1891.
Summary: —
The Character of this Week’s Illustrations. — The Second Competition for the Cathedral of St. John the Divine. — Disagreeable Features connected with it. — The Architects and the Trustees. — A Suggestion that our Subscribers shall Vote upon this Competition. — The Proposed Public Baths in New York. — The Stairway Accident in the Washington Apartment-house. — Proposed Course of Operations at Delphi to be followed by the French. — The Winner of the
Prix de Reconnaissance Americaine.............................................77 French Architecture. — V..........................................................................79 The Cathedral of St. John the Divine............................................81 Illustrations: —
Design and Plan for the Cathedral of St. John the Divine, New York, N. Y.: Mr. W. Halsey Wood, Architect. — Design
and Plan of the Same: Messrs. W. A. Potter and R. H. Robertson, Associated Architects. — Design and Plan of the Same: Messrs. G. M. Huss and J. H. Buck, Associated Architects. — Design and Plan of the Same: Messrs. Heins & La Farge, Architects.
Additional: Southeast View of the Cathedral of St. John the Divine, New York, N. Y. Mr. W. Halsey Wood, Architect, Newark, N. J. — Interior View of Nave and Chancel of Same Design. — Plan, Section and Perspective submitted in the First Competition. Mr. W. Halsey Wood, Architect. — Northwest Perspective View of the Cathedral of St. John the Divine. Messrs. W. A. Potter and R. H. Robertson, Architects. — Interior View of Crossing and Chancel of the Same Design. — Plan, Section and Perspective submitted in the First Competition. Messrs. W. A. Potter and R. H. Robertson, Architects. — East Elevation of the Cathedral of St. John the Divine. Messrs. Heins & LaFarge, Architects. — Interior View of Nave and Crossing of the Same. — Longitudinal Section of the Same. — Rear Perspective View of the Cathedral of St. John the Divine. Messrs. Huss and Buck, Associated Architects. — Longitudinal Section of the
Same...............................................................................................91
Communications: —
“Safe Building. ”— Storage-batteries for Electric-lighting...................... 92 Notes and Clippings.............................................................................................92 Trade Surveys................................................................................... 92
W
E wish to disarm criticism, so far as possible, by at once acknowledging that the manner in which the designs for the Cathedral of St. John the Divine are illustrated in this issue is unsatisfactory, the results being about half as good as they would have been could the negatives have been made in our own gallery. Instead of this we have had to put up with such light as the galleries of the Academy of Design in New York afforded on a number of successive Sundays, and in consequence have had to endure vexatious delay and unnecessary cost, resulting finally in disappointing plates.
SOME of our readers may have wondered why we have
made no comments upon this competition and the second set of designs submitted. Our reasons have been twofold: first, because of the undesirability of forestalling with criticism the intended publication of these revised schemes; and, second,
because the entire undertaking, from first to last, has been attended by so many unpleasant features, reference to which ought not to be avoided, that we have put off the disagreeable task to the last moment. Instead of being one of the pleasantest professional events that have occurred in this generation, this great competition has been one of the most disagreeable. The original scheme, which was generally understood to foresee the building of a great Protestant cathedral, by and with the joint assistance of all Protestant communions and for their joint occupation and enjoyment is now, as generally, understood to have changed in character to an endeavor to procure a great Episcopal cathedral. Yet the contributions of other sects are invited and are to be accepted. A Board of Trustees was formed and they, without the needed professional advice, prepared the programme for the first competition, and when the drawings, made in supposed conformity with it, were submitted, these Trustees endeavored, for weeks, to make a choice. Finding that in some ways the task was beyond their capacity they then appointed a board of expert advisers, but later, reverting to their first belief as to the superiority of their own judgment, they exhibited their appreciation of professional
advice by including in the designs to which were finally awarded the first places only one-third of the designs recommended by the expert advisers, adding to the list others which the experts had advised against. The loose manner in which the programme for the first competition was drawn by the Trustees may be known from the fact that, though it was supposed to call for “sketches, ” the experts found themselves unable, under its terms, to throw out the fully rendered design submitted by Mr. Gibson — which could hardly be thought by any one to be a “ sketch. ”
THE authors of the four selected designs were paid a modest sum for their work, and were asked to elaborate their
schemes for a final competition, hut as there was no satisfactory assurance given that the successful design in the second competition would be carried into execution, these architects naturally desired to know what was to be their compensation, and for nearly two years they were unable to get from the Trustees a reply to this pertinent question. What was the result? Two competitors let the matter rest and awaited the decision of the Trustees; the other two spent the intervening time in working up their schemes. Finally the Trustees answered the question asked so long before, and at the same time required that the revised designs be submitted in two weeks’ time. Think of it, to restudy a cathedra] design, make two perspectives at sixteenth scale, a colored interior view showing decoration, plans, elevations and sections in two weeks! — the Trustees consented to waive the matter of estimates. One design — elaborate with the work of months — was delivered at the appointed time. The protests of the other competitors procured an extension of five weeks, but how inadequate a relief that was is shown by the fact that one firm, in place of making new drawings, found themselves obliged to send in their first drawings embellished with “ flaps ” showing the proposed changes. In extenuation of the singular dilatoriness of the Trustees in informing the competitors what was to be the business footing for the final competition, it must be remembered that their plans were slightly disarranged by the suggestion that the Cathedral site might be needed for the temporary use of the World’s Fair. But as it was obvious that funds and working-drawings would not be ready till after the exhibition had been again distributed into its original particles, there was really no excuse to be found in it for keeping the architects in suspense. Besides these disagreeabilities of a general nature, there are special ones which concern each competitor. In a final competition of this kind the competitors could, and should, have agreed to a common interpretation of the programme, and for lack of it one of the competitors submits to the unguided and unguarded Trustees drawings at one-tenth scale, in place of the one-sixteenthscale drawings understood by the other competitors to be called for and adhered to by them, and adds a highly-colored perspective to the black-and-white ones required, but finds an excuse for his action in the loose wording of the programme. Another competitor has the fortune to be connected by ties of blood with the supposedly most influential Trustee, who, to protect himself from any possible charge of nepotism has, according to the newspaper reporters, most unnecessarily done all in his power to prevent his relative from being allowed to enter the second competition, though he won the honor fairly as an unknown competitor in the first competition. A third firm are now being sued for ten thousand dollars, and have been compelled to defend their right to use their design against an injunction suit, which vainly endeavored to prevent the exhibition of their design, all because they decline to add to their own names the name of a third architect who claims an interest in the design. Against the fourth competitor nothing is lodged save a charge of plagiarism, which few can hope to escape.
W
E do not think that this is a pleasant record for such an undertaking, and, more than this, these facts have so impressed us, that we cannot feel that there is any real meaning in this second competition, and hence that any discussion of the designs submitted in it would be barren of effect so far as the future building is concerned. It seems to us to be enough to lay before our readers the designs (poorly reproduced, we again admit) and the explanatory notes of the authors. One thing, however, seems to be plain, and that is that the
Vol. XXXII.Copyright, 1891, by Ticknor & Company, Boston, Mass.
No. 802.
Entered at the Post-Office at Boston as second-class matter.
May 9, 1891.
Summary: —
The Character of this Week’s Illustrations. — The Second Competition for the Cathedral of St. John the Divine. — Disagreeable Features connected with it. — The Architects and the Trustees. — A Suggestion that our Subscribers shall Vote upon this Competition. — The Proposed Public Baths in New York. — The Stairway Accident in the Washington Apartment-house. — Proposed Course of Operations at Delphi to be followed by the French. — The Winner of the
Prix de Reconnaissance Americaine.............................................77 French Architecture. — V..........................................................................79 The Cathedral of St. John the Divine............................................81 Illustrations: —
Design and Plan for the Cathedral of St. John the Divine, New York, N. Y.: Mr. W. Halsey Wood, Architect. — Design
and Plan of the Same: Messrs. W. A. Potter and R. H. Robertson, Associated Architects. — Design and Plan of the Same: Messrs. G. M. Huss and J. H. Buck, Associated Architects. — Design and Plan of the Same: Messrs. Heins & La Farge, Architects.
Additional: Southeast View of the Cathedral of St. John the Divine, New York, N. Y. Mr. W. Halsey Wood, Architect, Newark, N. J. — Interior View of Nave and Chancel of Same Design. — Plan, Section and Perspective submitted in the First Competition. Mr. W. Halsey Wood, Architect. — Northwest Perspective View of the Cathedral of St. John the Divine. Messrs. W. A. Potter and R. H. Robertson, Architects. — Interior View of Crossing and Chancel of the Same Design. — Plan, Section and Perspective submitted in the First Competition. Messrs. W. A. Potter and R. H. Robertson, Architects. — East Elevation of the Cathedral of St. John the Divine. Messrs. Heins & LaFarge, Architects. — Interior View of Nave and Crossing of the Same. — Longitudinal Section of the Same. — Rear Perspective View of the Cathedral of St. John the Divine. Messrs. Huss and Buck, Associated Architects. — Longitudinal Section of the
Same...............................................................................................91
Communications: —
“Safe Building. ”— Storage-batteries for Electric-lighting...................... 92 Notes and Clippings.............................................................................................92 Trade Surveys................................................................................... 92
W
E wish to disarm criticism, so far as possible, by at once acknowledging that the manner in which the designs for the Cathedral of St. John the Divine are illustrated in this issue is unsatisfactory, the results being about half as good as they would have been could the negatives have been made in our own gallery. Instead of this we have had to put up with such light as the galleries of the Academy of Design in New York afforded on a number of successive Sundays, and in consequence have had to endure vexatious delay and unnecessary cost, resulting finally in disappointing plates.
SOME of our readers may have wondered why we have
made no comments upon this competition and the second set of designs submitted. Our reasons have been twofold: first, because of the undesirability of forestalling with criticism the intended publication of these revised schemes; and, second,
because the entire undertaking, from first to last, has been attended by so many unpleasant features, reference to which ought not to be avoided, that we have put off the disagreeable task to the last moment. Instead of being one of the pleasantest professional events that have occurred in this generation, this great competition has been one of the most disagreeable. The original scheme, which was generally understood to foresee the building of a great Protestant cathedral, by and with the joint assistance of all Protestant communions and for their joint occupation and enjoyment is now, as generally, understood to have changed in character to an endeavor to procure a great Episcopal cathedral. Yet the contributions of other sects are invited and are to be accepted. A Board of Trustees was formed and they, without the needed professional advice, prepared the programme for the first competition, and when the drawings, made in supposed conformity with it, were submitted, these Trustees endeavored, for weeks, to make a choice. Finding that in some ways the task was beyond their capacity they then appointed a board of expert advisers, but later, reverting to their first belief as to the superiority of their own judgment, they exhibited their appreciation of professional
advice by including in the designs to which were finally awarded the first places only one-third of the designs recommended by the expert advisers, adding to the list others which the experts had advised against. The loose manner in which the programme for the first competition was drawn by the Trustees may be known from the fact that, though it was supposed to call for “sketches, ” the experts found themselves unable, under its terms, to throw out the fully rendered design submitted by Mr. Gibson — which could hardly be thought by any one to be a “ sketch. ”
THE authors of the four selected designs were paid a modest sum for their work, and were asked to elaborate their
schemes for a final competition, hut as there was no satisfactory assurance given that the successful design in the second competition would be carried into execution, these architects naturally desired to know what was to be their compensation, and for nearly two years they were unable to get from the Trustees a reply to this pertinent question. What was the result? Two competitors let the matter rest and awaited the decision of the Trustees; the other two spent the intervening time in working up their schemes. Finally the Trustees answered the question asked so long before, and at the same time required that the revised designs be submitted in two weeks’ time. Think of it, to restudy a cathedra] design, make two perspectives at sixteenth scale, a colored interior view showing decoration, plans, elevations and sections in two weeks! — the Trustees consented to waive the matter of estimates. One design — elaborate with the work of months — was delivered at the appointed time. The protests of the other competitors procured an extension of five weeks, but how inadequate a relief that was is shown by the fact that one firm, in place of making new drawings, found themselves obliged to send in their first drawings embellished with “ flaps ” showing the proposed changes. In extenuation of the singular dilatoriness of the Trustees in informing the competitors what was to be the business footing for the final competition, it must be remembered that their plans were slightly disarranged by the suggestion that the Cathedral site might be needed for the temporary use of the World’s Fair. But as it was obvious that funds and working-drawings would not be ready till after the exhibition had been again distributed into its original particles, there was really no excuse to be found in it for keeping the architects in suspense. Besides these disagreeabilities of a general nature, there are special ones which concern each competitor. In a final competition of this kind the competitors could, and should, have agreed to a common interpretation of the programme, and for lack of it one of the competitors submits to the unguided and unguarded Trustees drawings at one-tenth scale, in place of the one-sixteenthscale drawings understood by the other competitors to be called for and adhered to by them, and adds a highly-colored perspective to the black-and-white ones required, but finds an excuse for his action in the loose wording of the programme. Another competitor has the fortune to be connected by ties of blood with the supposedly most influential Trustee, who, to protect himself from any possible charge of nepotism has, according to the newspaper reporters, most unnecessarily done all in his power to prevent his relative from being allowed to enter the second competition, though he won the honor fairly as an unknown competitor in the first competition. A third firm are now being sued for ten thousand dollars, and have been compelled to defend their right to use their design against an injunction suit, which vainly endeavored to prevent the exhibition of their design, all because they decline to add to their own names the name of a third architect who claims an interest in the design. Against the fourth competitor nothing is lodged save a charge of plagiarism, which few can hope to escape.
W
E do not think that this is a pleasant record for such an undertaking, and, more than this, these facts have so impressed us, that we cannot feel that there is any real meaning in this second competition, and hence that any discussion of the designs submitted in it would be barren of effect so far as the future building is concerned. It seems to us to be enough to lay before our readers the designs (poorly reproduced, we again admit) and the explanatory notes of the authors. One thing, however, seems to be plain, and that is that the