THE MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS.

Press, Volume XLIII, Issue 6545, 14 September 1886, Page 3

THE MUNICIPAL BUILDINGS.

TO THB EDITOR OF TOT FBBBB. »».- Poeeibly it may be remembered that at the time the City Council accepted Mr Seager'e de«ign I ventured a few criticisms npon its demerits, criticisme which attracted considerable attention and found no answer. Apparently reoogniain* the justnera of my obeervationi, the Council altered the character of the principal entrance, the alteration entailing aa extra expenditure of some .£9O. In view of this, I am not without hope that, if I ever enter the completed building, I shall find the Btaircase and landinga rendered more convenient and harmonious than shewn in the original drawings, and the doorway to the Council Chamber a little wider than three feet.

j If my memory serves at the time the various competitive designs were on view the seotions of Mr Seasrer's plan were net complete, the roof being shown only in pencil sketches. In the presence of such incomplete work it would have been scarcely fair to offer opinion. But I say now that with a wide space to cover with an open roof in which the ties were thrown high up in the principals, any architect with a knowledge of his business would have hestowed upon the strutting-and tying his most careful attention. That Mr Seager's design waa wholly defective in this respect is shown by his own proposal to put in iron tie-rode. Ane Commission in their report recommend the use of " ribs of curved T iron," which will involve the expenditure of at least £130. Thus it will be seen that the two alterations (the dcorway and the roof) entail an outlay of j.220 upon the amount of the contraot.

It may be remembered that a superior design from an experienced architect was cast aside because its adoption would coat a hundred or fo more than the Council were then willing to expend upon the buildings. From the good start that has been made it will not improbably be found by the time the building haß been finished that it would have paid the Council handsomely to have accepted the much more perfect design. Having told the Council how much they will have to spend in fixing up Mr Seager's defective roof, the Commissioners go on to discover that the walls of the structure are all off the plumb, which they are good enough to admit is a defect. I never in all my life read anything so funny as the reason they put forward in order to account font. The knowledge displayed of bricklaying is simply immense. I would like to point out that the question raised is not whether Oamaru or White Bock Stone is the better, but whether the Btone stipulated for in the specifications is being employed. It is easy to see the gross abuses likely to arise with contractors if fast and loose tampering with the material supplied is permitted. It has been already pointed out by some one that the tender of the contractors was accepted because their sample brick was better, although their tender waa not the lowest. Now it is found that rejected bricks from another building have actually been used in building sleeper piers for the floors. Sleeper piers are clobo to the earth and liable to absorb the moisture from it; no sun ever reaches to dry them; therefore, if the bricks are not sound and hard, they are prone to crumble i away. I have known firebricks employed I by architects fcr the purpose that the re- j jected bricks from Clarkson's have been applied to. j

The Commissioners decline to give an unqualified approval of the way in which the concrete foundations have been put in, and having come to this conclusion, they think it is about time to praise the Clerk of Works and testimonialise the architeo „ After such a report their testimonial is perfectly Bplendid —Yours, &.., Obi tic September 10th, 1886.