ARCHITECTS NOT REGISTERED

Dominion, Volume 21, Issue 291, 8 September 1928, Page 10

ARCHITECTS NOT REGISTERED

INSTITUTE TAKES ACTION NON-PAYMENT OF FEES Section 27 of the New Zealand Institute of Architects Act, 1913, provides that “every person who, not being a member of the institute, uses in connection with his name under which he carries on business, the title, ‘Registered Architect,’ or the initials, ‘F.N.Z. 1.A.,’ or ‘A.N.Z.I.A.,’ commits an offence liable to’a tine of £50.” A breach of this section led to the institute taking action against Edwin Hoyden Wells, who appeared before Mr. IS. Page, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court yesterday, charged with unlaw fully using the initials “A.N.Z.1.A.. ’ and also with using the words “registered architect,” being words intended to, or likely to, cause any person to believe that he was a member of the institute. Defendant, who was represented by Mr. B. Egley, pleaded guilty to the charges. Mr. R'. Kennedy, who appeared for the Institute of Architects, stated that Wells ceased to be a member of the institute in 1926, and that on May 24 of this year, he was still using the title of “registered architect.” Mr. Page: What caused him to cease to be a member? ' ■ Mr. Kennedy: Non-payment,of fees. Your Worship. A short history of the case was given by Mr. Egley, who said that Wells was registered in 1912. He left New Zealand for active service.in 1915, returning in 1919, suffering from a war disability. While at the war he was automatically kept on the register. During the war period tire fees were raised, and when defendant returned he took a position with a construction company/ and for some time continued to pay his fees. Owing to his wai disability he was placed at a disadvantage in . connection with his work, in addition to which, be found difficulty in re-instating himself. Wells > had difficulty in paying his fees and was notified that his name would be struck off the rolls. This was done. He then moved to new offices, and used his old sign-board with the words “registered architect” on it. His old letterheads contained the initials “A.N.Z.1.A.,” but his new ones did not. In the directory, and in advertisements, he described himself as an architect (inly. In conclusion, counsel submitted that there was no suggestion on the part of the prosecution that Wells was not competent.' “The Act renders offenders liable to a tine of £5O. said Mr. Page, “and is obviously designed to protect the public.” A flue of £lO. and costs, was imposed on the first charge, and the second charge was withdrawn. WINDOW SIGN NOT CHANGED. Two charges of a similar nature were preferred against Herbert Thomas Barnes, who was represented by Mr. .1. McDuff, and who , pleaded not guilty. Evidence was given by Donald Gordon Johnston, secretary of the Institute of Architects, who said that Barnes ceased to be a member of the Institute in 192-1. and that on May 24 of this year the words “Registered Architect” were still visible on his office window at number 94 Willis Street. . Defendant, in the witness-box, said that when he ceased to be a member <>f the institute, ho scrapped all his letter heads. He denied that he had used the words “Registered Architect,” or used the initials, "A.N.Z.1.A.” since .1924. To Mr. Kennedy, he admitted that from 1924 to 1928 he had allowed the sigu “Registered Architect” to remain on his window in Willis Street. He carried on business there until December, 1927. When the words were cleaned off, he could not say. He added that the signs were almost indistinguishable, and that he always considered them useless on that account. Further, his main sigu on his door did not have the forbidden letters or description on it, the board reading, “H. T. Barnes, Architect.” Counsel for defendant submitted that the sign was invisible, from the street. Mr. Page: Mr. Johnston has said that he saw it from the street. Continuing, counsel contended that his client had no intention of deliberately passing off as a registered architect. This, he said, was borne out by the fact that Barnes bad had new lettei'-heads printed, and had had a new signboard printed. The Magistrate said that in view of the defendant’s present financial position he would not impose a heavy penalty. • Defendant -was convicted and ordered to pay costs.