Landscape- Gardeners and Garden Architects. 217 



architecture in Britain. It has deterred persons from employing regular archi - 

 tects, and either prevented them from building and improving at all, or com- 

 pelled them to have recourse to builders, carpenters, and persons of inferior 

 taste and knowledge. At the present time, when this kind of monopoly has 

 been partly broken up, and architects, in many instances, charge by the day, 

 or at so much per job, twenty are employed for one that was consulted thirty 

 years ago, and a proportionate number of handsome buildings have been erected 

 all over the country. We certainly would not employ a builder to make a 

 design for anything we intended to erect, however eminent he might be as 

 such ; because the designs from such a source, being generally prepared in a 

 routine manner in the builder's office, are frequently monotonous, and of little 

 value with reference to the taste displayed. We would employ an architect 

 whom we believed to be a man of genius ; pay him handsomely for his designs ; 

 and have them carried into execution, under his occasional inspection, by a 

 first-rate builder." (Sub. Gard., p„ 480.) 



" Some architects deceive their employers, by making very pretty and 

 attractive drawings, and reporting that the expense of carrying these into 

 execution will be about half or two thirds of what it actually turns out to be. 

 In this way they obtain the sanction of their employer to commence building ; 

 and, when the accounts are sent in, the employer finds himself involved, too 

 frequently, in ruinous expenses. The builder, in such cases, often gets into 

 disgrace, and is either obliged to commence an action to obtain his rights 

 (because the architect has the knavery, in order to screen his ignorance, to 

 say that the builder's bill is a most exorbitant one), or to have his bill cut 

 down so low, that he is left a loser instead of a gainer, after labouring hard for 

 twelve or eighteen months. To remedy this evil, I would advise the parties 

 intending to build, to contract with the architect for his commission, as well 

 as with the builder for his work. This might be done in the following man- 

 ner : — If the architect reports that the building will amount to 2000/., his 

 commission should be fixed at 100/. ; and, if the work exceed five per cent 

 beyond his report, it should be arranged that there should be a deduction 

 from his commission of five per cent on the excess of the amount beyond the 

 original estimate. Thus, if the original estimate were 2000/., and the actual 

 cost 2500/., the commission of the architect, instead of being 125/., as it would 

 be by the present custom, would be only 75/. ; whereas, had the amount been 

 within 2100/., his commission would have been 100/. By thus reducing the 

 architect's commission, instead of increasing it, when the expense exceeds the 

 estimate, as is now the practice, the temptation to give in false estimates would 

 be diminished ; though these estimates are likely to be often made, as long as 

 the inducement is so strong as it is at present. 



" Another very paltry trick, common among some architects, is their custom 

 of exacting from the builder a commission for all works done under their direc- 

 tion ; and, if this be refused, informing the builder that his services are no 

 longer required." (Arch. Mag., vol. i. p. 16.) 



When a gentleman has a dispute with his builder, and each party calls in a 

 surveyor to settle the difference between them, the usual mode of proceeding 

 in London, at least a few years ago, is very well described in the following 

 passages : — 



" The first thing I shall notice is that disgraceful mode of giving evidence 

 in courts of justice, which has made the very name of a surveyor a laughing- 

 stock for the legal profession ; his evidence in a court of law is looked upon 

 in the same light as that of a horse-jockey in a horse cause; and can we be 

 surprised at it, when similar evidence to the following is constantly given ? 



" Plaintiff A and defendant B are at issue upon an account for works 

 executed. The witnesses of A state that the work is done in a very superior 

 manner. One witness swears that the work is fairly worth 1,54-4/. ; and another 

 witness, to support him, swears the fair value is 1,030/. Then come the de- 

 fendant's witnesses, who state that the work is very badly executed, and done 

 in a very improper manner. One of them asserts that the outside value of the 



