Sessional_Paper_1901 — Page 689

684

For suggestion 2-

It is not possible nor usual anywhere for the Authorities (ie., the Building Inspectors) to go thoroughly into every design, calculate all the strains on piers, walls, columns, beams, &c., and thus take the responsibility of checking plans, nor is it possible for the Building Inspectors to thoroughly supervise all buildings in course of construction: this can only be done by the Architect and the Overseer who is constantly on the works and under the orders only of the Engineer or Architect of the job.

The Government Inspection should be quite general, to see that the laws of the Colony are observed, and we think that with all buildings under the supervision of qualified men and absolutely no constructive work carried out without such supervision, the task of Government Inspection will be comparatively light and will not necessitate a large staff.

Considerable building operations are now being carried out without any Architect and consequently without proper supervision, the owners not caring to pay for more than the plans and being satisfied with inferior work.

It is probable that most of recent failures will be found to have occurred on buildings not under the supervision of properly qualified persons.

We again draw attention to the evidence given at the Enquiry into the Cochrane Street disaster which showed that there was no skilled supervision, and to the evidence of Mr. TOOKER when he is reported to have said that he believed if the building had been under the supervision of a European Architect, when the roof had been removed the Architect would have scen at once the bad state of the walls and the disaster would have been averted.

The large amount of building now being done by Chinese Contractors without the supervision of qualified persons is having a deplorable effect on quality of work and workmen and in consequence it is getting more difficult every year to get good work done.

For suggestion 3-

Owners often decline or are unwilling to pay for the services of an Overseer, and it is not the duty of an Architect to be constantly on the work and thus ensure continuous good work and material.

For suggestion 4—

We beg to assure the Government that there is no desire on our part to restrict any qualified person from practising in the Colony, but we know to our certain knowledge of plans being made and work carried out by men who, we honestly do not think, should be permitted to do so.

We have the honour to be,

Sir,

Your obedient Servants,

WM. DANBY,

M. Inst. C.E.

PALMER & TURNER.

DENISON & RAM.

LEIGH & ORANGE,

M. M. Inst. C.E.