pediments, is largely the work of Lorenzo Maitani, of Sienna, who devoted more than twenty years of his life to the construction of this magnificent Gothic church, in which the pointed arch appears not as the key of the system, but as a
decorative element, harmonizing perfectly with the semicircular (Figure 14). Superior in general disposition to the façade of the Cathedral of Sienna (begun in 1284, after the design of Giovanni Pisano [1250- 1328? ]), the façade of the Cathedral of Orvieto cannot but awaken genuine and profound admiration in any one who is at all susceptible to the nobler forms of art.
The Cathedral of Sienna is also an admirable edifice; it bears perhaps a close relationship in its forms to the Italian Gothic school, but it has very little in common with the legitimate Gothic, either in its constructive or decorative elements. It furnishes an excellent example of the way in which Gothic art submitted to the laws of adaptation in Italy; its history is full of vicissitudes. After the proportions had been fixed, they were subjected to such changes that in 1339 the
question was agitated of making the old church merely a small section of the new; this suggestion was not carried out, either because of the defects discovered in the construction, or for lack of sufficient funds.
At Sienna there is also an interesting façade at San Giovanni, designed by Giacomo del Pellicciaio, exhibiting careful workmanship in the small columns, and in all the details; but unfortunately it has never been completed.
[To be continued. ]
Borghese Gallery Seizure — The action of the National Bank, the principal creditor of the Borghese family, compels the seizure of the Borghese gallery, and £320, 000 is asked for the collection. — Boston Herald.
ARCHITECT, OWNER & BUILDER BEFORE THE
LAW. 1 — XI.
THE ARCHITECT’S AUTHORITY AS AN EXPERT. — EXTENSIVE AUTHORITY OF ARCHITECT IN HIS OWN PROVINCE.
W
ITHIN his own province, as a man skilled in the art which he professes, the authority of the architect is very considerable. In practice, his authority over the contractors in any particular case is usually fixed by the terms of the contract between the contractor and the owner, but even then the law generally interprets any doubtful expressions in such a way as to favor giving the largest discretion possible to the architect, or whoever may stand in the place of the architect as the skilled director of the work.
In a Massachusetts case, 2 a contractor agreed to build drains for a city, in a skilful and workmanlike manner, under the general direction and superintendence of a committee, and to cause the work to be carried forward and finished with as much rapidity as it could reasonably and beneficially be done. One drain was built, and preparations made for beginning the other, when, about the middle of October, the committee ordered the work stopped. It was resumed the next spring, completed and paid for; but the contractor made an additional claim for damages for having been
AUTHORITY OF SUPERINTENDENT EXTENDS TO TIME WHEN WORK SHALL BE DONE AS WELL AS TO MATERIALS AND
WORKMANSHIP.
prevented from carrying on his work in the autumn before. The Supreme Court held that, “ by reserving to the committee “ a general direction and superintendence, the plaintiff agreed “ to conform to the reasonable directions of the committee, “ as to the time of doing the work, of which they were to “ judge, acting with an honest and just regard to the interests “ of the city. Under this stipulation they were not to act “ arbitrarily, capriciously and unreasonably, but, exercising an “ honest and reasonable judgment, the plaintiff, by his contract, “ hound himself to conform to it, and the city is chargeable “with no breach of contract. ”
It is probable that an architect, as being more skilled in the sort of work under his charge, and less likely to be biassed in any way, would find his discretion sustained by a court under similar circumstances, at least as completely as that of a committee, but the question does not seem to have come before our highest courts.
ARCHITECTS AS EXPERT WITNESSES.
Architects, however, often have to appear before judges and juries, and the respect felt for their opinion is shown by the fact that a controversy between an owner and a contractor is almost always decided in conformity with the architect’s judgment of the matter. Where architects are called as experts before a court, it is well for them to remember that they are entitled to privileges far beyond those accorded to ordinary witnesses; and, as the opposing counsel generally knows that
1 Continued from No. 828, page 84. 2 Chapman vs. Lowell, 4 Cush. 378.
Fig. 13. Siennese Arch.
Fig. 14. Façade of the Cathedral of Orvieto.
A Sketch for a Tower.
decorative element, harmonizing perfectly with the semicircular (Figure 14). Superior in general disposition to the façade of the Cathedral of Sienna (begun in 1284, after the design of Giovanni Pisano [1250- 1328? ]), the façade of the Cathedral of Orvieto cannot but awaken genuine and profound admiration in any one who is at all susceptible to the nobler forms of art.
The Cathedral of Sienna is also an admirable edifice; it bears perhaps a close relationship in its forms to the Italian Gothic school, but it has very little in common with the legitimate Gothic, either in its constructive or decorative elements. It furnishes an excellent example of the way in which Gothic art submitted to the laws of adaptation in Italy; its history is full of vicissitudes. After the proportions had been fixed, they were subjected to such changes that in 1339 the
question was agitated of making the old church merely a small section of the new; this suggestion was not carried out, either because of the defects discovered in the construction, or for lack of sufficient funds.
At Sienna there is also an interesting façade at San Giovanni, designed by Giacomo del Pellicciaio, exhibiting careful workmanship in the small columns, and in all the details; but unfortunately it has never been completed.
[To be continued. ]
Borghese Gallery Seizure — The action of the National Bank, the principal creditor of the Borghese family, compels the seizure of the Borghese gallery, and £320, 000 is asked for the collection. — Boston Herald.
ARCHITECT, OWNER & BUILDER BEFORE THE
LAW. 1 — XI.
THE ARCHITECT’S AUTHORITY AS AN EXPERT. — EXTENSIVE AUTHORITY OF ARCHITECT IN HIS OWN PROVINCE.
W
ITHIN his own province, as a man skilled in the art which he professes, the authority of the architect is very considerable. In practice, his authority over the contractors in any particular case is usually fixed by the terms of the contract between the contractor and the owner, but even then the law generally interprets any doubtful expressions in such a way as to favor giving the largest discretion possible to the architect, or whoever may stand in the place of the architect as the skilled director of the work.
In a Massachusetts case, 2 a contractor agreed to build drains for a city, in a skilful and workmanlike manner, under the general direction and superintendence of a committee, and to cause the work to be carried forward and finished with as much rapidity as it could reasonably and beneficially be done. One drain was built, and preparations made for beginning the other, when, about the middle of October, the committee ordered the work stopped. It was resumed the next spring, completed and paid for; but the contractor made an additional claim for damages for having been
AUTHORITY OF SUPERINTENDENT EXTENDS TO TIME WHEN WORK SHALL BE DONE AS WELL AS TO MATERIALS AND
WORKMANSHIP.
prevented from carrying on his work in the autumn before. The Supreme Court held that, “ by reserving to the committee “ a general direction and superintendence, the plaintiff agreed “ to conform to the reasonable directions of the committee, “ as to the time of doing the work, of which they were to “ judge, acting with an honest and just regard to the interests “ of the city. Under this stipulation they were not to act “ arbitrarily, capriciously and unreasonably, but, exercising an “ honest and reasonable judgment, the plaintiff, by his contract, “ hound himself to conform to it, and the city is chargeable “with no breach of contract. ”
It is probable that an architect, as being more skilled in the sort of work under his charge, and less likely to be biassed in any way, would find his discretion sustained by a court under similar circumstances, at least as completely as that of a committee, but the question does not seem to have come before our highest courts.
ARCHITECTS AS EXPERT WITNESSES.
Architects, however, often have to appear before judges and juries, and the respect felt for their opinion is shown by the fact that a controversy between an owner and a contractor is almost always decided in conformity with the architect’s judgment of the matter. Where architects are called as experts before a court, it is well for them to remember that they are entitled to privileges far beyond those accorded to ordinary witnesses; and, as the opposing counsel generally knows that
1 Continued from No. 828, page 84. 2 Chapman vs. Lowell, 4 Cush. 378.
Fig. 13. Siennese Arch.
Fig. 14. Façade of the Cathedral of Orvieto.
A Sketch for a Tower.