Page images
PDF
EPUB

12 May, 1927.]

Major HARRY BARNES, F.R.I.B.A., F.S.I.

for the Legislature to give some statutory recognition to your work?-That is the view that has brought us here.

90. Originally you thought that the proper course was not only to recognise your work, but to allow nobody else to call themselves architects?—Yes; we were following upon what we thought was a beaten track.

91. On the representations made to you you have come to the conclusion that you are prepared now to qualify that point of view at present?-Yes, somewhat regretfully.

92. Are you so satisfied that what you have already arranged with regard to architectural courses and with the excellence of the product, both the human product and the education given, that you are prepared to say now that if you have statutory recognition you will let those people who are marked with your Hall-mark compete with others? That is so.

93. So you are now very much like a chartered body who wish to give your Hall-mark after a proper course of study and examination? That is our position.

94. And you think that that will be advantageous to the public and advantageous to the status of the profession? That is so.

95. Are you satisfied that under the amendments you have now made no othe profession will be prejudiced in any way? -We think that no trace of restriction remains.

96. You let your Hall-marked architect be stamped on his merits?-That is so.

97. There was one question of detail which arose, and that was with regard to the fees charged?—Yes.

were

98. Of course, as long as you going to make it compulsory it was natural enough to say that no fees should be charged? That was the view we took.

99. I do not know-I am only guessing -but are you now so well satisfied with the advantage given by a University Degree that you think people on the merits will find that your Hall-mark is so valuable that they will pay a fee for being put on the register?-I have no doubt about that.

100. So that really, having got your scheme of education and your scheme of examination embracing all perons interested in architectural education, you think it is worth while taking this step now? That is so.

[Continued.

101. And it would really be a useful guide to the public if they want that article, to know that they can get it by the register?—We are fully convinced on that point.

102. May I say that we are very much indebted to you for having in black and white brought before us the amendments you suggest. Are you satisfied so much with this position that you are willing, as regards removal, to do what is not done in another profession which we need not mention, and have a judicial tribunal on this point consisting of the Public Health Minister and a trained lawyer? -That is so.

103. And also in the case of removal you are willing to give an appeal to the Courts? That is so.

104. Now just going to one other matter, have you in considering your schedule not only considered the question of your relation to Universities and learned bodies, but also those who are engaged in the practical work of building? That is so.

105. And have you noticed that in the schedule as amended you have put in representatives of the actual operative workers? That is so.

106. And is that your deliberate policy, to associate with your work the special knowledge of those who work with their hands in building?-Yes, not only in our educational policy, but in the whole policy of the Institute.

107. Linking together the whole of the educational side and the University side with the practical side?—Yes.

108. And that is the deliberate object of your Bill and of your policy?—Yes.

109. And if the Committee thought fit you would see no objection to extending that policy, to admitting a representative of such a body, and do you wish to bring education of the highest type within the reach of those engaged in manual work? -Yes, we should have no objection to that.

110. Then may we take it that you would value the Bill and that you think the Bill will be very useful even if limited and amended in the manner that has been suggested?-I should say the value we place upon the Bill is the measure of what we feel to be the concession we have given, rather than lose it.

111. You are so satisfied that your Hallmark is a good one, and you would like

12 May, 1927.] Major HARRY BARNES, F.R.I.B.A., F.S I.

to have more competition in the market? -Yes, that is so.

Chairman.] We are all obliged to Sir Alfred for the questions he has put, which are very much to the point.

Sir Frederick Rice.] Owing to the précis having been sent to my country place and only having seen it this morning, I have not had an opportunity of looking it through. I take it that if anything occurs to me, I may have an opportunity of asking Major Barnes questions on the next occasion?

Chairman.] Certainly.

Sir Frederick Rice.

112. There is just one point I noticed in glancing through it. Dealing with page 25 of the précis, under the subjectmatter of Clause 7, is it the intention of the registered architects in reference to sub-clause (3) to ignore the arbitration clause in a contract in the future? "In all cases of dispute between employer and contractor the architect must act in an impartial manner." I do not suggest that he will not do that. I presume that the Disciplinary Committee in interpreting their powers would have regard to well-established custom and precedent, and as that, of course, does involve the principle of arbitration in building contracts to a very large extent, such principle would be recognised by the Disciplinary Committee. That is what I should anticipate.

Sir Murdoch Macdonald.

113. You will observe, Major Barnes, that if Clause 20 of the original Bill is thrown out, as I understood a moment ago you suggested might be done, the Second Schedule would go after it?-I do not think that would be quite the case. I think the Second Schedule would be retained by Clause 5. Clause 5 (3) brings in the Second Schedule for the purposes of admission.

114. Did the various bodies mentioned in the Second Schedule ask to be entered on the Schedule?-I could not say that we have had direct requests to that end, but the Bill, of course, has been widely circulated, and I think we have had no exception taken to being placed upon that Schedule. There were some bodies who asked to be included, but I do not know of any cases where any body desired to be excluded from it. A request of that kind would, of course, receive assent.

62445

[ocr errors]

[Continued.

115. In view of the alteration which you have now agreed to, that is, calling this new body registered architect " rather than "architect," would not your Charter, and does not your Charter, in fact, confer upon you all the benefits which this Act would give you?-If we were confining our outlook to the Members of the Institute, of course our Charter gives us everything. We, as Members of the Institute, do not gain anything by this Bill. As Members of the Institute, we are already able to distinguish ourselves by the use of the term of the Charter. I should like to correct the impression that this Bill is put forward in the interests of the Institute. This Bill is put forward in the interests of architecture and the architectural profession, and it is an attempt to secure for the general body of architects something of the position which at the present moment attaches to that of membership of the Institute.

116. Is not the Council of the Institute practically to regulate the new body of registered architects? No. I thought I had made it quite clear that the Council maintains the Register, but the question of admission to the Register is one in which all the bodies in the Second Schedule share; and the question as to exclusion from the Register is a question in which very important external influences will play a part. So that really what the Council is doing under thiswhat it is asking to be permitted to doit feels it will be an honour to which its position and its work entitles it-what it is really asking to be allowed to do is to set up and maintain this Register and, if the Committee decide that it is not to be allowed to charge any fees, what the Institute will have to do in return for that honour will be to bear the cost of the Register out of its own funds; so that I do not think it could be suggested that the Council regulates the Register in any uncontrolled or arbitrary fashion. Safeguards are introduced at every point, and everything that we possibly can do has been done.

117. Is not that guaranteed to anybody who makes application to your present Institute? Under your present Charter is there not free entry, provided that any applicant meets the stipulations or the examinations of the Charter? Has he not a free right to enter?-Yes, of course, the person who comes into the Institute comes in freely in a sense, but he comes in as a Member and undertakes financial

B

12 May, 1927.]

Major HARRY BARNES, F.R.I.B.A., F.S.I.

obligations.

Admission to the Register is not admission to the Institute. Under this Bill a registered architect may not belong to the Institute and may not contribute a penny to the funds of the Institute; he will derive a great many advantages from the existence of the Institute, but he will be put under no burden at all. This is a Bill for putting people on to a Register of Architects; not for putting people into the Institute of British Architects. Some of its Members think we shall suffer.

118. Looking at Clause 60 on page 16 of your précis, do you still hold that that is correct: "The suggestion that the work of the architect, either on a large or a small building, can be with equal competence carried out by someone with a purely engineering knowledge, shows a misconception of the architect's indispensable function and of the work necessary for the design and erection of a building."-Yes, I think so, if that paragraph is taken with the whole of the paragraphs; it is really a summing-up of the paragraphs. You

an

get the whole argument from paragraphs 44 to 60, and, on the argument from paragraphs 44 to 60, I think that the assertion made in paragraph 60 is sustained. There is no attempt here and if the impression is given I should like to remove it entirely -to make invidious comparison between engineering and architecture; that is not in our minds at all. What it is desired to do there is to show that there are certain factors which must be brought into operation to get architecture which need not necessarily be brought into operation to get a purely engineering work.

119. Do I understand you say that you are agreeable to Clause 12 being removed from the Bill? Yes. We gave that undertaking, that Clause 12 should come out, at the time that Clause 11 was unmodified. What we are asking the Committee to consider now is whether, in view of the fact that Clause 11 has been modified, a modified form of Clause 12 might not be inserted.

120. Because you have left a part of Clause 12 still in the Bill. In your Amended Bill part of Clause 12 still stands? No part of Clause 12 stands in the sense in which Clause 12 stood before. What we are suggesting should be done is that to the registered architect and the registered architect only should be applied a course of proceedings which in

[Continued.

the former Bill we asked should be applied to all architects.

121. You think it would be reasonable to have this amended Clause in the Bill, notwithstanding the fact that you are not in future to control all architects?We think it is not unreasonable if a person holds himself out as a registered architect and secures employment on that basis, to preclude him from recovering fees if he is not registered.

[ocr errors]

122. But he is not precluded from using the term registered architect " under the amended Clause 11 in any case?—He is subject to a penalty if he uses it; it is really an additional penalty. If a person who is not on the Register holds himself out as a registered architect, he is first of all subject to a penalty; he may be fined for doing so; and if by so doing he has secured employment, if this amended form of Clause 12 remained, he would not be allowed to recover his fees. It is not a new thing. You will find it in preceding Registration Acts and in the Legal and Medical Acts.

Chairman.

123. You might perhaps put in another clause altogether. Amalgamate Clause 12 with the latter part of Clause 11, and make it one clause?-It is really an additional penalty.

Mr. Gardner.

124. You take it as an additional protection to the public?-It is an additional deterrent.

Sir Murdoch Macdonald.

125. As regards exceptions under the Bill, and in reply to a query which has already been put to you, there has been difficulty about allowing anybody who should start work a few years hence, after say the expiry of five years referred to in the Bill, becoming a registered person unless they have passed all these examinations, whereas in other Institutions it is possible that people who have done a great deal of work and competently carried out a great deal of work should, without passing the preliminary examinations in particular, be admitted. you prepared to make exceptions of that kind or to have them entered as an additional class in the Bill ?-I should like to be quite clear as to what is proposed. The Bill at present fixes a period of five

Are

[ocr errors]

12 May, 1927.] Major HARRY BARNES, F.R.I.B.A., F.S.1.

years during which the ordinary practitioner can come in and become a registered architect; but it does provide in paragraphs (a) and (b) of Clause 5 that certain persons who arrive at such distinction, either in early life as to get a diploma, or in later life to become a 'member of the the Royal Academy, can come in at any time, and if it is thought that there may be exceptional cases of persons who may arrive at such distinction, after a period of five years, as to justify their admission to the register without any examination, and if words can be found to give effect to that, we should not resist them in any

way.

126. You are aware, for instance, that a great many men who go abroad at such an age that possibly they have not joined any of the societies in this country, they come back later in life, after having done highly competent and meritorious work wherever they have been, would not be able to become registered architects unless they were to go through all these preliminary examinations in particular referred to in the new Act, and you are aware that the profession of Civil engineers, in particular, does make exceptions of that kind for men who have had great distinction and who are, say, over 45 years of age?-That kind of case arises much more naturally in your profession, Sir Murdoch, because, of course, engineers do carry on some of their greatest works in other parts of the world than this. It does not arise so much in connection with architecture; and in addition to that the organisation of the Institute is so far flung that we have got allied Institutes in every part of the world. There is hardly a civilised part of the British Empire that a man could go to without being in touch with some Society allied to the Institute; but on that I am quite sure we should be quite willing to accept a precedent founded upon so well established a regulation as pertains in the Engineering Institution, and if words were put in that would bring within the scope of this Bill an exception similar to that, we should not resist it at all.

Mr. Lindley.

127. I would like to ask Major Barnes if the deletion of sub-section 4 of Clause 5 is to be insisted upon? It means that you would have the power to charge your

62446

[Continued.

fees. Will Major Barnes tell us the amount of such fee or fees?-The amounts of such fees are limited under the Act. If you turn over to Clause 16 you will find there is a proviso to Clause 16 (a): "Provided that such fees and charges only shall be prescribed as shall be not more than reasonably sufficient to provide for the expenses of the Council in the execution of this Act so far as the Council can estimate the same "- and those fees would come within the purview of the Privy Council. So that first of all an estimate would have to be made and the Privy Council would have to be satisfied that it was a reasonable estimate before they would allow the fees to be charged.

128. I quite understand that position, but can you now give us an estimate of the amount of the fee or fees that would be charged?--I could not at the moment. I would be quite willing to go into it. It could only be a very small fee because it is not a fee that has to cover any other cost of the Council than the cost of the administration of this Act.

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

12 May, 1927.]

Major HARRY BARNES, F.R.I.B.A., F.S.I.

133. You have deleted the words: provided that this section shall not apply to any services rendered in pursuance of any contract made before the passing of this Act." Why should those words be deleted? Would it not prove to be injurious to any architect who might not be registered and yet might be quite competent ?-I think I can explain that simply to you. Those words were first of all put in when we were dealing with the word architect. Before the passing of this Act men had been calling themselves architects, and there might have been a great number of contracts entered into with the word architect in, and those contracts might be prejudicially affected by this clause if the Bill had been passed with the word "architect." The term "Registered Architect" will not come into being until this Act is passed, and therefore there are no contracts which could be prejudiced, and in consequence the words are not necessary. That is the only reason why they are taken out.

134. Some contracts extend over a very long period of time.-But there will be

[Continued.

no contracts in existence in which anybody will be described as a Registered Architect, and it is only such contracts that are affected.

135. The architect who would be affected is the man who is not registered.-Take the case of the person who has attempted to get on to the register and has failed: he can go on practising as an architect, and this Bill does not affect a man practising as an architect; it only affects a man practising as a "Registered Architect."

Mr. Gardner.] Or pretending to.

Mr. Lindley.

136. There are many competent architects who may not apply to be registered and they may continue to practice?Yes, as architects.

137. If they are regarded as registered architects

Captain Wallace.] They will not be. Mr. Lindley.] By some people they might be. If these people could put up an excuse and refuse to pay, that would be very injurious.

[blocks in formation]

Major HARRY BARNES, F.R.I.B.A., F.S.I., recalled. Chairman.

138. Major Barnes, you remember at the last meeting it was understood that you were to receive certain questions? -That is so.

139. I understand that you have not received them?-Up to the present I have not received them, but I gathered that Mr. Tasker had probably not had an opportunity of letting me have them.

« PreviousContinue »