W. L. B. Jenney, Geo. C. Mason, R. H. Hunt, C. M. Bartberger, J. W. Moulton, Arthur B. Jennings, Jul. G. Zwicker, Thos. Tryon, A. W. Brunner, William R. Ware, Thos. Nolan, Chas. E. Colton, Henry M. Congdon, H. J. Brainerd. Jos. Wolf, Henry Rutgers Marshall, Theodore de Lemos, Louis De Coppet Berg, Albert H. Kipp, Louis H. Sullivan, E. O. Fallis, Henry C. Meyer, Chas. I. Berg, Jas. E. Ware, W. L. Plack, Henry A. Macomb, Chas. C. Haight, F. A. Wright, R. C. MeLean, Henry B. Ingram, N. Le Brun, R. M. UpJohn, C. Powell Karr, G. W. Keister, A. G. Thomson, Alfred H. Thorp, F. S. Barnum, Geo. W. Kramer, O. G. Traphagen, Chas. A. Cummings, Jos. Blaby, J. W. Yost, T. D. Evans, Jno. H. Coxhead, Wm. C. Smith, H. H. Bickford, Jas. G. Hill, Amos J. Boyden, J. F. Harder, Frank Miles Day, R. H. Robertson, A. W. Cordes, Jos. C. Hornblower, R. C. Sconce, William C. Prichett, Jr., Walter Cook, Geo. Edw. Harding, C. H. Blackall, Samuel Huckel, Jr., Edward Hazelhurst, H. A. Linthwaite, Wm. F. Donovan, Henry M. Frankel, John M. Carrère, Jno. M. Donaldson, Howard Constable, Stevenson Constable, Bernard Vonnegut, Thos. Hastings, Wm. Rotch Ware.

The President read his address as follows:

PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS.

Fellows of the American Institute of Architects:

GENTLEMEN :-During the last year ten Fellows of the Institute have passed away: J. B. Johnston, Alpheus C. Morse, P. W. Reuhle, George H. Edbrooke, August Bauer, George Walter de Cunha, William Henri Adams, William Worth Carlin, Arthur Rotch and James Douglas.

Mr. Carlin was one of the Presidents of the Western Association of Architects and a Director of the American Institute. Mr. Rotch's whole manhood was unselfishly devoted to the higher interests of his profession, to which he not only gave much of his time but also a large part of his fortune. We mourn for those who have gone; their honorable lives have left indelible impressions on our hearts and on the records of the Institute.

Since we met together, thirty-two new members have been elected and three new Chapters have been formed, the latter being: The Southern Californian, The Washington State and The Brooklyn. The Organization now contains twenty-six Chapters and about six hundred members.

I congratulate you on the continued usefulness of the Institute; it has been conservative, though positive and progressive.

During the last twenty years the methods of practice of our profession show much improvement, due largely to the moral support of this body the influence of which has been wise and benificent; for, while it has from time to time recorded its convictions, it has refrained from insisting too rigidly on the observance of its rules. Through it, the beliefs of the Architects have been crystalized, while each man has been left quite free to pursue his own course. Though, as individuals we have been led or constrained by the consensus of the opinions of the Fellows; we have been moved more by a desire to conform to the established standards of professional life than by any fear of discipline.

It is a good thing for the Institute to publicly express its views concerning vital matters of professional conduct. Until the Schedule of Fees was published, uniformity of charges did not exist and there was no authority to back us in our demands for reasonable renumeration. Now, however, both the Federal and State Courts, in the absence of agreements to the contrary, accept that document as conclusive. The people have accepted as reasonable and just, what the Institute has decided to be proper and right, and thus many abuses have been cured. I believe the converse will be true and that the people will believe those things to be unreasonable and unjust which the Institute stamps as improper and wrong.

In the long run, men are dealt with according to their estimate of themselves, and if we seek for higher standing among our countrymen, we must live up to the ideals of our more unselfish moments. Let the Institute, therefore, condemn those things which we have all called wrong but some of which we have continued to do; let this condemnation be printed on the Schedule of Fees, so that Courts, Clients and Architects hereafter may not fail to understand our views; let the publication continue until custom shall have established laws too rigid to be broken, and until all men have learned to conform. There are clients now who will not deal with Architects who are not in good standing among their Fellows. This is a growing class of men. We should let them know what is regarded as unprofessional conduct. In his dealings with us I believe the average American will readily conform to the standards that we ourselves set up.

If clients demand and easily obtain preliminary services for little or nothing, it is our fault, not theirs; our own greed and unfairness to each other enables them to use us. We know this well and have often privately spoken of it among ourselves. Let us put a stop to this practice; it has been going on for hundreds of years, but it has always been productive of evil and the time has come to say so publicly.

A young man, immature, not ready for independent professional life, makes sketches, or goes into a competition, without promise of pay. In an evil day for him, his design is accepted and at a bound he springs into full practice. He makes a financial success and an artistic failure, and when the fever of youth is past, if he has the soul of a real architect, he looks back with bitter sorrow to the waste of his best possibilities. As he begins, so must he go on; knowing not enough, and no longer having the time for study, his last work is like his first, suggesting talent or mediocrity, according to the nature of the man, but bearing the marks of weakness, due to arrested development, and stamped with the author's sad consciousness of imperfection or conscious insolence.

The custom of showing designs to clients without pay, in the hope of "getting the job," is bad for the architect, worse for the client and worst of all for the suffering public who must be inflicted with the crudities of our youth.

Not so long ago, practitioners of the law and of medicine solicited patronage, to do this now would lower the standing of any Lawyer or Doctor, and he would be called a pettifogger or quack. What is true of them should be true of architects, if we are to keep pace with them. A lawyer or doctor may not go about introducing himself and soliciting business, nor may he take fees materially less than the customary ones. No more should an architect. If the Institute condemns these things, architects must conform and stand squarely on its decision, or lose cast in the eyes of the profession and of the public.

Mr. John M. Carrère has printed and circulated a paper on Preliminary Fees. The suggestions contained in it are of high value. Let a new schedule of fees be made, containing his modifications, and a statement that it is unprofessional to make preliminary drawings, for a competition or otherwise, for less than the regular fees, and I believe the abuses we have so long suffered under will soon disappear. There is great virtue in the formal publication of any truth. On the same document should be printed an expression of our belief that the best way to obtain satisfactory designs is by employing outright an architect known to be skilled in the special work proposed to be done; that the next best method is by a competition limited to a few experienced designers, and that the poorest is by unlimited competitions.

Extensive amendments to the by-laws are proposed, and are to be acted on at this meeting. I do not wish to discuss them, but only to express the hope that nothing will be done tending to lay us open to the charge of being a trade union instead of a deliberative society of professional men.

For nearly a generation there has been a constant effort on the part of the

Institute to introduce better methods in the designing of government work. Our Committees have been met courteously in Washington. They have always received assurances of sympathy, but have never until now had the active support of the proper officials.

A bill has now been introduced in both branches of Congress, which has received the endorsement of the Secretary of the Treasury, of the Senate and House Committees on Public Grounds and Buildings, and of the officers and friends of the Institute. There is a strong ground for the belief that it will become a Law. For this result the Institute owes special thanks to Messrs. Post, Price, Carrère and Kendall who, together with Messrs. Hunt, McKim, Peabody and others, have brought it about.

The bill provides for a commission of five men, who shall have charge of the selection of the architects of all public buildings, erected by the United States. Three members of it are to be architects, appointed by the President. Should the measure become a law, it is evident that its success will depend upon the architects of the Commission. The President will undoubtedly be inclined to nominate the foremost men of the country, and the question naturally arises whether those selected by him will serve. On this point I wish to say that no one should allow himself to refuse for any cause except ill health. If an American would serve his country in any public capacity, it must nearly always be done at great personal cost. We all preach this doctrine, but when it comes to the test, we are apt to shirk our duties. Let the Architects set an example to their fellow countrymen, should the opportunity be offered to them to do so. Those fitted for the high functions proposed under the bill, are the men who have large business interests. If they be requested to serve, and refuse, their example will result in defeating the very purpose for which the bill is framed, the Commission will fall into the hands of inferior men, and its operation will become a reproach instead of the great benefit we are looking for. I have no doubt that the passage of this bill will be followed by nominations for the commission of men who can least afford to give their time to the work. But they must accept, because in their hands will lie the fate of this glorious opportunity. If it be allowed to fall into the realm of perfunctory officialism, because the Chief Magistrate cannot induce the proper citizens to take the places, the curse of a degraded public architecture will fall on us and we will be justly condemned. The highest expressions of the people's art never rises above that of its public monuments. Remember that the monuments of to-day are the public buildings, and that to start work on them aright under this bill, the services of the most able men in the profession will be demanded, and that no one should refuse to do his part of the duty.

The Secretary read the 28th Annual Report of the Board of Directors.

TWENTY-EIGHTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS.

To the Fellows of the American Institute of Architects:

The twenty-seventh annual convention which was held in Chicago in July and the opening days of August, in connection with the World's Congress of Architects, will long be remembered by those who were so fortunate as to attend it and to share in the enjoyment of that unrivalled display of Architecture which housed the World's Columbian Exposition. The generous hospitality of the Illinois Chapter, the fine drive which was given to the visitors for the purpose of showing the interesting streets, parks, boulevards and architecture of Chicago, and the sail on the Lake, ending with the enchanting view of the illuminated White City and the display of fire-works, are among the choicest memories of one's life.

In the fifteen months which have intervened there has been much to engross the attention and tax the energies of your Directors, a short resumé of which is herewith submitted,

Mr. A. Page Brown, of San Francisco, was elected by the Institute as a Director for three years, the nominating committee having put his name on the printed ballot without ascertaining that he was not a Fellow of the Institute. The Board of Directors therefore declared Mr. Robert Stead, of Washington, D. C., to be elected, he having the next highest number of votes cast.

The first meeting of the Directors, which occupied two days, was marked by a very full attendance and at that meeting the Buffalo Chapter officially called the attention of the Board to the design of the proposed Buffalo Federal Building which re-opened the question of entrusting the designing of the Government buildings to the office of the Supervising Architect, or of opening them to a properly devised and equitable competition. The details of the contest and the merits of the case have been so fully discussed in the correspondence of the President and the Board of Directors with the Secretary of the Treasury and the Supervising Architect; in the admirable paper prepared by Mr. Glenn Brown, a Fellow of the Institute, and in the discussions of the architectural journals and the press of the Country, that it is not necessary to rehearse the story but simply to state that the so-called McKaig Bill, which will if passed bring about the desired reform, has been reported upon favorably by the House Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds, and is now on the Calender in the House with every prospect of its passage in both the House and the Senate, and if passed will probably receive the signature of the President.

The Board of Directors wish to thank the Special Committee of Architects, Messrs. Bruce Price, John M. Carrère, and E. H. Kendall, who have had this matter especially in charge in Washington, for their untiring exertions and successful work, and also the whole body of the profession both in and out of the Institute, for the interest created in the subject through the local press and for the promise of support which has been obtained by the personal appeal to Senators and members of Congress by individual members of the profession.