ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE.

New Zealander, Volume 9, Issue 772, 7 September 1853, Page 2

ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE.

To the Editor of the New-Zeala*der. Sib, —In your issue of Saturday last, a letter from Air, Mason is published, in which he states, that, in the design for the Government House submitted by me, I intend throwing two girders 12x6 over u space of 70 feet. I regret on Mr. Mason’s account, as he has attempted to fasten on me so serious an error, that he should have been inaccurate in his statement of facts. The space over which I intended the girders to be thrown is 31 feet—not 70 feet—and each mrder would be sustained by four nearly equidistant points of support; -affording sufficient strength to carry a lantern light of much greater weight than the one they are designed to bear. The remaining portion of the distance between the columns of the hall, which is unoccupied by the lantern, is roofed in a manner similar to that shewn in the Section for the other parts of the building. Air. Mason assumed the length of the Girders to be 70 feet without sufficient ground for so doing; as he had no plan before him from wlidr he could have ascertained what length I intended them to be.—l am, &c. Reader Wood. Auckland, September 5, 1853. To the Editor of the Nbw-Zeaiaxder. Sir, — In reference to a letter on the subject of the successful designs for a Government House, bearing the signature of Mr. William Mason, one of the competitors, and which appeared inyoui paper of the 3rd instant, we beg to make the following remarks : It is stated that the ground plan and a section of Design No. 2 had “ been removed.” This is true. After hanging for fourteen days in the Council Chamber and the Mechanics’ Institute, those drawings were removed in order that detailed estimates and specifications, which had been required, might be prepared from them. Mr. Mason, in noticing that jthe width of the Reception-room, in our plan No. 1, is thirty feet) asserts that joists of such dimensions “would be subject to great deflection, and the result wool be, in the first place, destruction to tlm ceding, and ultimately the downfall of the building. We do not believe, sir, that there is a carpenter in the colony who would profess himself ud® so to frame a joist of such a length as, that by eflection, it should cause thej destruction ot ceiling below ; or that thirty feet is Jan imprac>~cable width for a ball-room. . Mr. Mason further states that the partitions or the upper rooms, “ from their position, be trussed,” and infers that their weight bear on the joists below. # m. This assertion and inference are transverse partitions, which only divide a S* rooms, were intended to be trussed, ana tn bear upon briqk and stone walls, of su thickness for their support. The doors partition are arranged with a regard trussing. That the trusses and. frames shown in the transverse section is owing, , their absence, but to that section leauing if the hall and staircases—a different part ol building. • to 1 The drawings furnished, sir, we^. e i n“workshow the design, and were not intended .» ing drawings” of detail. The latter 1 called for, otherwise, we suppose that A.r. would not, in his design, marked dum,’ 1 have shown two 9-inch partition® £ ported over his drawingroom; in the desig *, D’Elire, tico unsupported partitions over chen; have forgotten to take his kitchen, room, and dining-room chimneys ,tnr K first floor and roof, and have arranged brick wall, entfrcly unsupported , over ms room. We are, Sir, Your obedient servants, _ C. Heaphy & J- ****** August sth, 1853.