ARCHITECTS' COMMISSIONS.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XX, Issue 3927, 8 June 1877, Page 3

ARCHITECTS' COMMISSIONS.

Some days ago we published a telegram from our Dunedin correspondent in which it was stated that Mr Bathgate had strongly commented on the practice of architects charging a per centage to successful tenderers for " furnishing them with plans. On the same subject a letter appeared in The Times signed a " London Parson," producing the following replies which were published in the JBuilders' Trade Circular : — Sir, — As a veiy old member of the profession of architects, and as one of the founders of the Royal Institute of British Architects, I must own myself astonished that a "London Parson," should, in The Times of to-day, have brought the sweeping accusation against the profession, that ' ' in the case of church buildings, at all events, of which alone he had had experience, he believed it to be an undoubted fact that the architect not only claims his 5 per cent, commission on the total expenditure from the employer, but also a commission from the various tradesmen for every article of furniture supplied, from an organ to a hassock ; and, for what he knows to the contrary, it may be from the builder also. " I beg to inform the " London Parson" that such a practice in one of our profession is repudiated by the whole body of practitioners as discreditable, dishonorable, unjustifiable. If the "London Parson" has unfortunately fallen into such hands and his architect be a member of the Royal Institute of British Architects, and he will favor me with the name of the culprit and the ijroofs of such malpractices, I undertake to get the expulsion of such Fellow or Associate under the following grounds in the rules of our body : — " For the receipt or acceptance of any pecuniary consideration or emolument from any builder or other tradesman, whose works he may have been engaged to superintend, or for having- any interest or particition in any trade, contract, or materials supplied at any works, the execution whereof lie may be or have been engaged to superintend." It is by such a safegurrd that the Institute has sought to protect the interests of the employer and the honor of the profession. Thomas L. Doxaldson". 21, Upper Bedford-place, W.C., January 4. (Sir, — A "London Parson" must have been very unfortunate in his selection of architects if fie has found any dishonest enough to take commissions from tradesmen. He woidd have done well, I think, to have made further enquiry before stating his "belief" that "it is an undoubted fact that architects generally do such things. " If he had done so, he woidd have found that the Architects' Institute not only condemns such conduct as it deserves, but would expel any member who practised it. A "London Parson" has no right to shelter himself under an anonymous signature, and accuse an honorable profession of corruption on the strength of "I believe." If he is prepared to substantiate his accusatfon, let him lay the facts before the Institute, and I am certain justice would be done. Edward M. Barky, R.A. 21, Abingdon-street, Jan. 4. The sentiments expressed in the above (says the Circular) will doubtless be repeated by the great majority of the profession, and it is creditable to that Institute that it should provide such stringent rules to meet such cases. Speaking personally, we may state that during a long and extensive acquaintance with the profession, we have never met with a single instance in which an architect has claimed, or ever suggested the giving a commission on goods supplied to his specification.