SIR,—The title of Mr. Mellanby's article is surely misleading; a
'case' cannot be made out without evidence. Mr. Mellanby merely makes assertions. He seems to have a sense of grievance against his archi- tect, and in consequence gives vent to a number of general charges of incompetence against the whole profession. Some of his statementsL-such as that architects commonly design drains that run uphill, and taps which cannot discharge into their sinks—are so blatantly silly that one is inclined to doubt whether anything in the article deserves the compliment of a serious reply. He even drags up the old canard about architects making buildings more expensive in order to increase their fees, when, in fact, most of us spend a large part of our time trying to find more economical methods of construction to offset rising building costs. Of course, well-built permanent laboratory blocks cost more than Nissen huts, but most university authorities, and industrial concerns such as ICI, think it worth their while to put up buildings of a good standard, if only with a view to reducing maintenance costs.
Had Mr. Mellanby given specific cases it would have been passible for the architect concerned to have put forward his side of the matter, and it is very possible that a rather different picture would have emerged; also, of course, that Mr. Mellanby might have found himself with a libel action on his hands. But he has' preferred—with your co-operation—Abe safer course 'of libelling a whole profession by general statements which, by their nature, do not admit of disproof.—Yours faithfully,
F. L. JACKMAN 1 V erulam Buildings, Gray's Inn, WC1
Previous page
