5 July, 1927.]

the other was that it was going to set up a man who would be content with the term "registered architect " and not go forward to become a Member of the Royal Institute of British Architects, and would destroy the influence and the prestige of the Institute, but of course those arguments are irreconcileable and they are inconsistent.

66

1583. You have not yet answered the question as to whether it would be possible to put in the Bill any definition of architecture?-I think it would be quite possible to put a definition of architecture" in, but it would be a definition I am quite sure that would raise more difficulties than it would remove. It must be perfectly clear to the Committee now, that in dealing with architecture you are dealing with a profession that fringes away on all sides into other professions and there is a sort of "No Man's Land " between the one and the others, where you cannot draw a boundary line. For instance, if we had to draw a boundary line between an architect and a Civil Engineer, this Committee would have definitely to say that railway stations, for example, were or were not architecture. seems to me that this Committee could never be expected to say anything of the sort. And if one went on the other side, as between the architect and the builder, one would have to try and find some building there which could be left to a builder and from which the architect could be excluded. Everybody has got a sufficient idea of what an architect is and what a builder is and what engineer is. As far as the Bill is concerned, it will not interfere with the discretion of people at all, in the future, in its effect. As regards a definition, nobody has been able to propose one.

It

an

1584. Do you know if there is any professional definition given in any registration Act?-No; to attempt to define a profession in this particular Act would be to attempt to do what has never been done before, in any registration Act, for the reason I have mentioned. You cannot draw a hard and fast line between one profession and another.

1585. Then the builders contended that their interest is inadequately represented on the educational side, I think that question has been asked before?—Yes, I have dealt with that.

Mr. Lindley.

[Continued.

1586. Before you pass from that, Major Barnes said that the profession spreads out into a sort of "No Man's Land." Is i not because architecture spreads into land belonging to several men that you have the difficulty? It spreads out into every man's land almost and then you come into conflict with other interests?I do not think for practical purposes there is any real difficulty. It is when you attempt to find some form of words which you can put into an Act which would really meet all conditions. What will happen under this is, if any question of what is architecture is raised it will come to be construed by the bodies that the Act sets up, and on that, as far as I am able to judge, no difficulty has ever been found. For instance, the Institution of Civil Engineers say in their precis that they exclude architects from becoming members of their Institution. Now that is clear; that the Institution of Civil Engineers must have some definition of architecture and some definition of an architect which enables them when a man comes along to say: "You cannot come in because it is clear you are an architect; the work you are doing is architecture." I am merely quoting that to show the difficulty is not a practical

one.

Chairman.

1587. Now, Major Barnes, will you turn your attention to Clause 5 subsection (b) of the amended Bill. It reads thus

every person who has gained a diploma in architecture from any University in Great Britain or Northern Ireland." Is there any objection to insert " degree or "after the word "gained "?—No, we should have no objection to that.

1588. That suggestion is made by the London University?-I understand there is some distinction.

1589. Then the Secretary of the Faculty of Extra-Mural Studies, Cambridge University, has written expressing the Board's anxiety that the teaching of the University School of Architecture shall not be in any way fettered by the Bill. The Board would prefer the expression diploma in Architectural Studies" to be substituted for 66 diploma in architecture." What are your views on that? -On that I would say that we inserted the words "diploma in architecture

5 July, 1927.]

after discussion with the Cambridge University; and we were under the impresIsion that we had satisfied them. We think that the words that they suggest now are no improvement; that they rather make the thing vague.

Mr. William Hirst.

ask

1590. Upon that point may I Major Barnes, is it proposed that they should pursue any point of agreement with the Cambridge people on this question, in view of the fact that they have previously considered this particular point, that is, your original definition?— We leave this, of course, to the Committee. What we are saying, Mr. Hirst, is, we do not think their second thoughts are any improvement on their first.

1591. I am rather inclined to agree on first reading, but is there going to be a really serious point of contention ?-If it became a serious point of contention, we would waive it rather than pursue it. Chairman.] I do not think Doctor Cranage meant it in any way to be a serious contention, otherwise he would have come here and given evidence.

[Continued.

apparently there is an Association of Teachers in Technical Institutions as distinct from an Association of Technical Institutions. On the face of it, we should have thought that the teachers were covered by the Association and did not want separate representation, but if the Committee think otherwise, personally we have no objection to their being added to the Board. Our original idea with regard to the Board was to make it as wide a representation as we could.

1596. You have read Professor Pite's evidence? That is so.

1597. He thought that the test for candidates for registration was likely to be rather too academic. Is there any way of meeting that point?—In the first place, the whole tendency of architectural education is away from the academic; and, in the second place, we think that that tendency is likely to be accentuated by the constitution of the Board of Architectural Education. We are bringing on to that Board not only these teachers, but we are bringing on the Board representatives of the Crafts, and we have already got the Builders there.

1598. There is one more question I should like to ask upon Professor Pite's evidence, and I think it has been suggested by another witness. You have already, I think, answered many questions on the point in your examinationin-chief, but there has been some little doubt thrown upon that evidence by Professor Pite, who seemed to think that the poor boy was not sufficiently considered or thought of in the Bill. Perhaps you could say whether, in your view, there is any foundation for a suggestion of that kind?-My attention has been drawn to the evidence that Professor Pite gave on that matter. So far as I understand it (it has not been printed yet, I think) it was to the effect that there were rungs missing in the ladder of education, and that the ascent was not as easy as it might be. As a test of that I have had the figures got out with regard to the last 115 boys in Great Britain that we have admitted as probationers to the Royal Institute of British Architects. There are 115 applications, and these applications all give particulars of the educational qualifications of the boys, and this is what we have found. I propose to hand this paper in.

5 July, 1927.]

[Continued.

The following paper was handed in:

"Major Barnes in his statement to the Select Committee and in answer to questions by Members of the Committee made it clear that there is nothing to prevent clever boys from the elementary schools from obtaining the full professional qualification of the R.I.B.A., that there are many cases in which this has been done, that special steps have been taken by the R.I.B.A., both by the provision of maintenance' scholarships and in other ways, to ensure that an 'educa

tional ladder' is available for the clever poor boy. A diagram was submitted showing the exact method by which elementary school boys in London can obtain the qualification. Figures of cost were also put in to show that while a few of the 'Recognised Schools' have comparatively high fees, there are others in which the fees are very low, while there are large numbers of technical institutions in the country in which boys can prepare for the R.I.B.A. examination in which the fees are very low indeed or are remitted in the case of holders of scholarships.

"It would seem from his evidence given to the Select Committee on 29th June that Professor Beresford Pite held the view that the elementary school boy was practically debarred from the R.I.B.A. qualification, that the high cost of training put it out of the reach of the son of poor parents, and that, apart from a very few exceptional cases, only the public school boy could fully qualify as a member of the profession, and that it was, in fact, a gentleman's profession,' and that the proposed Registration Act would crystallise this tendency.

"An examination of figures and facts shows that Professor Beresford Pite is under some misapprehension on the point.

"An examination has been made of the application forms of the last 115 boys in Great Britain actually admitted as Probationers of the R.I.B.A., and now preparing for the Intermediate Examination.

We found that 29 of the 115 were already pupils at Recognised Schools." Of those pupils in the Recognised Schools there were four who came from elementary schools; one from private schools, ten from secondary schools, and fourteen from public schools. These are boys in "Recognised" schools, where the education is of the most expensive character, and you might expect the boys in the main to come from the higher schools; but when you come to deal with the 86 boys who are left, this is the position with regard to them; these are boys not in "Recognised Schools": five of these boys only were at private schools; eight at public schools; 17 at secondary schools, and 56 of them began their education in Council elementary schools; so that out of the 115 boys there were 60, or more than half of them, who began their education in elementary schools.

Mr. William Hirst.

1599. What period of time does that cover?-These are our last 115 applicants. I should think it is probably in the last year.

5 July, 1927.]

1600. For the full year?-I should say So. I could add that note to the statement.

Mr. Lindley.

1601. Can you tell us what period of time these boys spent at the elementary schools? That I could not tell you, but the point is this: there is the rung they started on.

1602. That is the point to you. The point to me is whether or not they were attending the elementary school from necessity or from choice. It has happened in the past that many boys have been sent to the elementary school when their people could have afforded to send them to a Public School?-Yes, I do not know that our particulars would elucidate that. Chairman.

1603. Then, Major Barnes, you have handed in a memorandum (Appendix No. 9) dealing with the estimated cost of the education required to enable the necessary qualification for registration to be obtained?-That is so.

Chairman.] That paper has been circulated, and I would like to ask Members of the Committee if they have any questions to put upon that memorandum?

Mr. William Hirst.

a

1604. On page 2, under the London County Council (I take it this is their architectural scheme of education), boy can graduate from the elementary school right up to full tuition at a total cost of nil?-That is the cost of education as distinguished from maintenance and education fees. I have given those on a separate note.

1605. What I am seeking to get is this It says: "Case H. A student taking a five-year cost at the Architectural Association School of Architecture." The school fees amount in the five years to £327 12s. ?-Yes; that is the top cost. 1606. I should like to ask if you think there are many children of working class people who could take up a course of tuition of that kind?-May I ask, is that really what I conveyed or seemed to convey? Take a working class boy: if he is a clever boy and can win scholarships, under the London County Council scheme he could win a scholarship into the University of London School, on page 4; that is, £239 8s. Od.; and under the Institute's Own scheme which they have adopted as a sort of supplementary scheme, he could get a provision which

can

[Continued.

would enable him to go into the Architecture School, supplementing the County Council position, so that if he is a clever boy he can go right the way through. Now, if he is not a boy clever enough to win scholarships right through and he wants to come into the architectural profession, he cannot go through that sort of primrose path; he has got to take a road which is a little dustier. If you take the one on page 3, he might go and become a pupil in an office, and if he does that, he has got no school fees; he work at night, and go to schools and take evening classes, and the cost that is worked out there is some £9. Now, I am not speaking of what I do not know. The only education I ever got was in an elementary school, and I had to work my way into the architectural profession right up along these lines as a pupil, taking evening classes, studying, and taking the examinations of the Universities, and all the rest of it. so I can speak with first-hand knowledgə of the fact that even in those days a boy could get into the architectural profession without very much behind him. Things have immensely improved since those days, and while, of course, like in everything else, there are degrees of expense, and, of course, wherever there is money you can get more than where there is not, and a boy who is an absolute duffer, if his father is a rich man, can be sent to the Architectural School, and he can get him through-but a poor boy, if he has the brains, he can get right through; if he has not got the brains to win the scholarships, there are other ways which are still available, so it mounts up from nothing to £9, or £27, or £94 in a regular scale. A boy may earn scholarships that may take him to one and not to another. I should be very much surprised to learn that there any profession in the country to which access is as open and to which there are such aids as in the architectural profession. Of course, there is a long way to go yet, I quite agree, but with the advance of education, and that sort of thing, there is every opportunity for him.

was

now

1607. May I take Case D and ask you this: You take First, Second and Third year Courses. "A student in Birmingham taking a three years' full-time course at a school and then completing his training in an office." The total cost is £94 10s. Od. What is the prevailing

5 July, 1927.]

system with regard to taking on pupils in an office? Are they articled at premiums, or do they get to be earning a small salary in a reasonably short time-The general tendency is for some diminution in the practice of taking pupils although, taking the country at large, there are a great many offices which are still taking them, and that is shown from these last figures I have given. Out of the 115 boys who have come in during the last year, only 29 have come through the schools; the balance of them must be coming as pupils. The question of premium, of course, depends very largely upon the reputation and position of the firm. If you have a firm in good practice and there is a great demand to get into the office, naturally you have got to pay for it.

1608. And what would the figure be of the firm you have just now in mind?— They would vary. I should think if you were to get down into a small provincial town

1609. Say, Bradford.-I would rather take a town myself. I should think the premium you might get in for would be perhaps £100, and then they would go on beyond that to £300 or £400 probably, according to the town and the position, reputation and the influence, and that sort of thing. For instance, what happened with myself was, I did not pay any premium at all, but I worked a year longer.

1610. Does that obtain now?-Yes, one would have cases of that kind.

1611. One can imagine that system prevailing more in the time of Major Barnes' educational period than to-day. Of course the whole idea now is to get the boy into a school or the classes, if he can, and then get him on into the office.

Chairman.

1612. Now I come to my last question. You were here when Mr. Alexander gave evidence on behalf of the Co-operative Societies? Yes.

1613. Have you any observations to make upon his evidence?-I have heard that evidence, and I have seen the clause, and we are prepared to accept that clause, and also to accept those representatives on the Board of Architectural Education.

[Continued.

1614. Then you are now in complete agreement with the Co-operative Societies? That is so.

Mr. William Hirst.

1615. Is it your view that under the amended form of the Bill as we have it before us now that there would be the slightest difficulty in the Co-operative Movement and also individual Societies carrying on the practice?—I think they are absolutely secure; no question can arise, I think. I was inclined to think that the amendments we made ourselves sufficiently safeguarded them, but the addition of this new clause that Mr. Alexander proposes puts the thing absolutely beyond question.

Chairman.

1616. Thank you very much, Major Barnes. I am afraid you have been a long time in the witness chair and you must be very tired. I am sure we are all very much obliged for the very able, very clear and succinct manner in which you have helped us in this matter.Perhaps I might be allowed, on behalf of the Royal Institute of British Architects, to thank you, Sir, and the Committee, for giving us the very fullest opportunity of presenting the case for the Promoters of the Bill. May I just, in leaving, hand in, or draw the attention of the Committee to an amendment with regard to Northern Ireland that we propose to insert? The point of it is this, that the Ulster Society of Architects desire a provision to be put in the Bill which will enable them to deal with this matter in subsequent legislation in Northern Ireland. I think the amendment will make itself clear when we hand it in.

Chairman.] Thank you.

The amendment was handed in and was as follows: :

(Amendment suggested by Ulster Society of Architects.) Sub-section (3) to Clause 21, page 8.

For the purpose of enabling the Parliament of Northern Ireland to repeal or alter the provisions of this Act in its application to Northern Ireland this Act shall be deemed to have been passed prior to the appointed day referred to in the Government of Ireland Act, 1920.