subject and then to another, and of doubtful connection, should never be allowed.

Terms Used in Grading Material. Words should be used in their most common meaning, and if an expression indicates only a trade term for a locality, it should be so stated. "First quality" as a trade term, for example, may not mean the best in the market; "Extra No. 1" shingles are not so good as "Extra"; "6-cut" stonework may show many stones which would not appear if "Good 6cut" were called for. If the architect is not fully informed on these points, he should study more carefully the grades of materials being put into buildings, and how they appear in structures that have stood for some time. Visits to supply houses, mills, shops, and stoneyards, will repay the time spent.

Such expressions as "best", "proper", "sufficient", etc., are capable of being interpreted in very different ways, according to the point of view of a good or a poor workman.

Accuracy of Statement. Generally speaking, adjectives and adverbs and all general description should be dispensed with. The requirement that work shall be finished "in the best possible manner" means very little. A reasonable interpretation of "best work" for a house costing $1,500, would be entirely unsuitable for a house costing $15,000; and as all through the scale the meaning varies, it will be evident that the contractor, influenced by his intent to make a profit, and the owner, influenced by his desire to get his money's worth, will have widely separated views as to what the "best" is. The architect, in attempting to decide the question, is likely to get the ill-will of both.

Each requirement should be so carefully written that there can be only one interpretation, with absolutely no doubt as to its true intent. If the specifier hopes to get better work through some hidden meaning in the specification, he is doomed to disappointment; for the more expensive interpretation will be used by the contractor in making his bid, but later, when the work is required, he may plead that, on account of the uncertainty of meaning, he should not be required to do the work the more expensive way without extra compensation. Make the specification fair and honest, for it is the basis on which the architect will stand as arbitrator during the progress of the work.

It should be remembered that it is the province of the workmen to comprehend and not to originate; and so the statement of what is to be constructed should be made very clear, leaving nothing to the imagination of the contractor. A statement in the specification of what could be better shown on the drawings is likely to be poorly comprehended by the builders; on the other hand, the owner of the building will be wont to think more of the specification, since he can understand this more clearly than he can the drawings. There should be nothing, however, in the specification, or in any part of the work, to discourage originality, personal interest, and the exercise of judgment on the part of the workmen.

Province of Specification. Before a specification is begun, its limits are fixed by the drawings; on them the scheme is illustrated fully, the material indicated in a general way, and all sizes shown. Two tasks are the imperative duty of the specification writer:

(1) To acquaint himself most carefully with all that is illustrated by the drawings;

(2) To determine all that is not given in the drawings. Having settled in his mind the second point, he has the province and the limits of his work before him; for, as above stated, it is the province of the specification to set forth those points which cannot be explained by the drawings. A most careful study of the drawings, therefore, is necessary, in order to learn every point in the proposed scheme which they do not cover-points which must be covered in the specification.

To attempt to emphasize requirements already fully shown in the drawings, by calling attention to them again in the specification, adds nothing in the way of obligation, and has the effect of casting doubt on those requirements which are not thus doubly set forth.

A careful consideration, then, of the province of the specification will show that its functions are to define the relations between the different parties, the conditions under which the work is to be done, and the materials used in execution. These are the points which have everything to do with the cost of the work. In building, as in most other items, the form and shape have less to do with the cost than have the conditions under which the work is done and the materials required therefor.

As Relates to Contractor. Specifications should never impose conditions which can involve the contractor in any unnecessary trouble or expense. They should aim so to modify all conditions that the contractor will feel others are co-operating with him to produce the desired result without unnecessary expense or inconvenience. The result desired should always be made perfectly clear and apparent in the wording of the specifications; the means of obtaining that result should, except in rare cases, be left to the judgment of the contractor, who alone is responsible for such result.

Sometimes it is imagined that, unless the conditions are set forth with some degree of harshness, the owner will feel that sufficient protection to his interests has not been provided; but, before the completion of the work, he will probably realize, from the smoothness with which the work progresses, that the tact of his architect has saved him much annoyance and a considerable sum of money.

As Relates to Architect. The writer of the specification must clearly bear in mind, throughout his entire work, that the architect is to occupy a unique position in carrying out the work-a position which in almost no other line is occupied by one individual. The architect is the confidential professional adviser of his patron; and also, as the work progresses, he is to be the unbiased arbitrator, often between opposing interests, one of which is that of his patron or employer. The office of arbitrator is difficult, and one which it is generally impossible to occupy at all times to the satisfaction of both parties; and as the unconscious influence of the patron's interests is very likely to warp the judgment of the architect in making interpretations which must govern, it is very necessary that in the specification all matters be stated so clearly that differences of interpretation will seldom occur, and that when they do occur the specification will give the architect ample standing room, so that his judgment may be accepted without either party feeling wronged.

"Standard specifications", which require "standard materials”, put in by "standard methods", have done their part most fully to discourage owners, contractors, and, finally, architects. The same judgment used in buying supplies of life that will satisfy require

ments, should be used in buying building material; and success in buying depends on knowing how to buy.

Parties Concerned. Owner. The owner is the autocrat; his wishes are to govern, and unless his interest can be thoroughly aroused, the transaction will probably end unsatisfactorily. There is no person so hard to serve as one who, while feeling it necessary to build, has no interest in the process. The work, when done, will never be quite what he thought it would be, and he will never be satisfied. The interest of the owner should, therefore, be enlisted concerning as many details of materials as possible, and the reason for using one and not another. His questions will at first be trying. Possibly the first query will be: What will be the increase in cost of a brick or stone-faced house over a wood house?—and no amount of argument or explanation will convince him that no definite ratio exists. But the question can be used as an excuse to discuss the different qualities of brick, or the kinds of stone which he prefers, and soon technical knowledge of these materials will awaken an interest and call out more rational questions. This discussion will reveal the kinds of materials which will be satisfactory to the owner and an estimate quickly made by the architect will answer the question.

It is the right of the owner to understand all the differences in quality of materials, and why each kind is to be used. If he does not, he will probably be much annoyed by the wiseacres, who are sure to criticise everything delivered on the site, and the end will probably be severe criticism of the architect, who "did not know enough to specify the best." It will rarely occur to the owner, that, had the "best" been specified, it would have carried his building well into the hands of the mortgagee. The owner's interest if once aroused, will lead to a co-operation with the architect and the contractor, which will encourage the owner to "give and take” in minor matters, to the mutual advantage of himself and the contractor.

It is, further, the owner's right to have freaks and notions; and, after a careful presentation of the case, his ideas as to materials, though they may be decidedly different from those of his architect, should be respected, and the material incorporated as dictated by him. Herein is the opportunity for the architect to use his best

technical knowledge, and so to meet the conditions that in spite of them the result will be satisfactory. The architect who says that he carried out the dictations of the owner and is not responsible for the result, is likely to lose a patron and possibly to make an enemy.

Contractor. As a general thing, the only object the contractor has in mind in taking the work is the pecuniary profit to himself in the transaction. It is rarely that satisfactory results can be obtained from a man who is losing money; generally he so manages that the owner is as great a loser, and the architect is blamed for the losses of both.

While the contractor is under obligations, after taking the contract, to carry out the work "as directed", it is well to remember that his assumption of the contract was a purely voluntary act, and that he was under no obligation to take it. It is his right to know, before he puts in his bid, just what he is expected to furnish and to do, not to be left to furnish what, in the judgment of someone not interested in him, are materials of "best quality" or "good quality." Nothing will so much tend to draw from the contractor the best results, as to sense a feeling of co-operation on the part of both the owner and the architect.

Specification Writer. The central figure in this transaction is the specification writer. His tact must arrange the conditions under which the work is to be done; his technical knowledge must supply the data, and set forth in clear, explicit language, the description of the material which the contractor is to furnish and the owner is to accept. He is to be the arbitrator when any question arises affecting the interests of both in conflicting ways, and for his own comfort the arbitration must be such that both sides will see its full justice. In order that the necessity for arbitration shall present itself as seldom as possible, it is essential that all the conditions. and questions liable to cause misunderstanding be fully studied and settled in the specification. It is the duty of the superintendent to see that the contractor follows out the requirements of the specification, but it is unfortunate to have the specification so loosely written that the requirements are ambiguous, or at least not explicit, and the contractor is made to feel that he is distrusted, or that he is obliged to furnish materials or labor at a loss under an arbitrary