Editorial Comment

Progress, Volume XII, Issue 2, 1 October 1916, Page 737

Editorial Comment

From the somewhat forbiddinglooking columns of figures in the latest Municipal Handbook we learn a few pleasing things about muniCijjai. jjumj.y. The community rightly looks to its civic organisation for the provision of means of culture and recreation which are the right of everyone, but which are beyond the average individual’s means. Parks, picture galleries, and libraries must be the concern of the municipality, and we think the New Zealand borough councils show, in the main, a very enlightened attitude towards these amenities of life. This conclusion comes of studying the Municipal Handbook statistics which show that the expenditure by boroughs upon streets and footways amounts to £645,878, while the money spent on parks, gardens, town halls, libraries, art galleries and places of public recreation in one year totalled £108,263. So that for £6 spent on purely utilitarian objectswhich must come first—our civic governors appropriated £1 for the higher things of life. Perhaps it is not fair to the chief cities, with their widely differing population, to gauge their comparative interest in libraries, parks and art galleries by their expenditure, therefore it is not for the purpose of making odious comparisons that we quote the amounts spent by them on things which arc valued by those who love beauty and knowledge. The yearly expenditure on parks, gardens, town halls, libraries, art galleries and places of public recreation in the four chief centres is shown as follows: Auckland .. .. . . £44,544 . Wellington .. .. ~ 8,822 Christchurch .. .. .. 779 Dunedin . . ~ .. 9,074 Christchurch is fortunate in its endowments, therefore the ratepayers arc not called on to foot the bill for the maintenance of the chief beauty spots.

Municipal Aids to Culture

Motor Tanks Mr. Philip Gibb's thrilling descripin the War tion of the English Army new motor aid to victory was one of the brightest bits in the recent war columns. It stirred our imagination: we turned our minds back to boyhood days, when we absorbed Jules Verne's wonderful imaginative efforts foreshadowing the submarine and other mechanical wonders which have nearly all come to pass. Once again we find truth stranger than fiction. The advent of a motor "tank" which could cross trenches, butt trees to pieces, and try conclusions successfully with brick walls, struck terror into the enemy and caused surprised delight to cable readers. Nothing on ordinary wheels could run such a remarkable obstacle-race, and we suspect that the British Military engineers have successfully adapted to their business the caterpillar principle of traction, which is well known in motor-engineering work. The system is of special value in connection with farm tractors, which have to travel over soft ground. Instead of being fitted with the usual large-diameter driving wheels with a broad tread, the "creeper" runs on an endless chain. There are two wheels on both sides at ground level, but they are toothed, and the chain runs between them and the ground surface. When the toothed wheels revolve, the chain is forced around, and as it has about four feet of contact with the ground, between the toothed wheels, the resultant motion is progressive, while the large area of ground contact prevents slipping or "bogging." "Creepers" have evidently been evolved with a longer ground contact enabling them, if necessary, to bridge a trench. In tractor practice, the height of the "creeper" can be varied, so that one side of the tractor runs in a furrow, and the other on the unbroken soil at a higher level. A large number of these "caterpillar" tractors are in use on English farms, and the principle is of course well known to the Germans. Our engineers, however, seem to have stolen a march on the Hun, though that "kultured" gentleman has a great capacity for profiting by other people's inventiveness. We trust that British brains and engineering experience and resource will provide a few more trump cards like the motor tank.

A Modern Industrial Weakness

One of the worst results of our present-day competitive system is the eternal demand for cheapness. An architect is rarely given a free hand to design the best possible building of the most appropriate design and materials. Even if he had that privilege, the work would be tendered for, and the contract let to the lowest tenderer who would then proceed to carry out the work which he had secured at the lowest rate, in the quickest and cheapest fashion consistent with the minimums imposed under the specification. The system is here, and cannot be got rid of because it has obvious commercial advantages, if nothing else. But the serious disadvantage is that the workman has no real personal interest in his job. The only place

where ideal working conditions prevail nowadays seems to be the technical school. We read in the latest report of the Education Department's technical school inspectors that excellent examples of woodcraft have been completed at most of the schools, largely due, it is considered, to the fact that the work has been carried out under somewhat similar conditions to those under which most of the old-time woodwork was produced, when the mechanic who constructed the piece of work was responsible for its design, the method of construction, the constructive and decorative details, and the actual manufacture of every part of it. Sometimes we hear of a demand for "a good job," instead of the cheapest. Occasionally an architect is delighted to discover an enlightened and affluent client who studies results rather than cost. It is a pity such men are rare, but as New Zealand gets over its raw developmental stage, the architect, builder, and wrokman will more frequently obtain work to gladden the heart by completely satisfying their artistic yearnings.

The Architect’s Certificate

Is the architect’s certificate final and conclusive, and binding upon the owner This important point was fully argued in the Auckland Supreme Court recently in the claim of Johns & Sons, builders, against Webster & Tonks, owners of the new Grand Theatre, Auckland. Certain general extras were ordered by the architect, and variations made in the specification on the same authority. The owners paid various sums totalling £12,350 on the architect's certificate, but the final certificate for £448 7s. was not followed by payment, the owners declining to recognise this as final and conclusive and binding upon them. The form of the contract had an important bearing on the question. it contained an arbitration clause founded on the form of contract sanctioned by the iioyal institute of British Architects some years ago. in his judgment, Mr. Justice Cooper held that the arbitration clause extended to all matters or things arising out of the conditions thereto, ‘not otherwise distinctly provided for.’ There was, said His Honour no provision in any of the clauses of these conditions which made the certificates issued by the architects final, nor was there any clause taking a dispute in reference to such certificates out of the ambit of the arbitration clauses. Under these conditions the employer was bound by many of the acts of his architect, for instance where the architect authorised extra works or deviations from the contract, but the question of the price to be paid was within the scope of the arbitration clause. This judgment is so important to architects and the building trade that we propose in next issue to publish it in full, with the arbitration clause which was included in the contract under review.