The Honeywood Files (13 page)
Grigblay’s letter strongly suggests that the stuff he is cutting is first class, and that Spinlove’s objections are due to ignorance. The fact is that the established form of specification with its impracticable stipulations is not the best for securing first-rate work; a more discerning and indulgent description, which shows that the person specifying knows what he can get and means to have it, is the right thing, and enables a builder to understand what he is actually expected to provide. For instance, what exactly does “well seasoned” mean? How long seasoned and in what form? Seven years felled and three years in plank can be had, and the builder will provide it, or its equivalent, if he has allowed for it in his tender.
SPINLOVE TO GRIGBLAY
Dear Sir, 27.1.25.
I raise no objection to the general quality of the oak, but the specification is definite in ruling out sap, shakes, etc., and I must require you to conform to it.
Yours faithfully,
James is riding for a fall.
GRIGBLAY TO SPINLOVE
Dear Sir, 3.2.25.
Our shop foreman has now selected and got out the whole of the planks we propose to use for window and door frames for your inspection, and we shall be glad to have your approval of same before they go to the mill.
We may say that the planks we are selecting from have been in store for more than four years.
In the event of your not approving same perhaps you will let us know where we are to get it.
Yours faithfully,
This is a distinctly stiff letter for a builder to write to the architect. It is clear that Grigblay has no great respect for Spinlove’s practical knowledge or experience and has no great regard for him personally. Spinlove, one imagines, is helpless: how is he to tell Grigblay what he wants or where it is to be got when he does not know? He ought, however, since he has approved of the general quality of the oak, to refuse to approve it in detail in plank, for the suitability of the components of the window frames to be cut from the planks will depend entirely upon the skill and judgment of the joiner in laying out the work and scheming to avoid defects. If Spinlove accepts definite planks he will prejudice his position if, in avoiding waste, defective timber is worked up into jambs and cills.
GRIGBLAY TO SPINLOVE
Dear Sir, 12.2.25.
We shall be obliged if you will now favour us with certificate for £2,000.
We are sorry to say the frost has got into the upper course of brickwork and some of the pointing has been caught. We have the green work well covered, but the papers say frost is to continue, so we have stopped bricklayers. Bloggs has set out the main drain to sewage outfall and we should like to get on with this if you will approve same. We notice there is a provision of £350 for septic tank and filter beds and shall be glad to have your instructions.
We are awaiting details of brick window-cills; there is a lot of bed and back cutting to these and we should like to put bricklayers to work on it.
Yours faithfully,
SPINLOVE TO GRIGBLAY
Dear Sir, 16.2.25.
I enclose certificate No. I for £2,000. I was on the site yesterday and agreed set out of main drain. The branch drains I will deal with later on. The exact level of the outfall will be fixed by the anaerobic tank; I will send you particulars of the work covered by the provision for this as soon as possible. I enclose detail No. 21 of brick window-cills and weatherings; the lengths of these cills, you will note, vary, so that in order to keep joint widths constant, i.e. 1 ½ in., and the bricks equal in width, it will be necessary in some cases to reduce the bricks by cutting or rubbing so that exact regularity is maintained.
You will note that the cills and all weathered members are to be bedded, jointed, and pointed in cement waterproofed with Puddlyt. This must be carefully attended to as the bricks are absorbent and not to be relied on to keep out water.
Yours faithfully,
GRIGBLAY TO SPINLOVE
Dear Sir, 17.2.25.
We are obliged for detail No. 21 showing brick cills, etc., and note your other instructions. With regard to gauging the brick cills we shall be glad to have your authority for the extra as same is not included in the contract. Are we to understand that the same rule applies to brick heads and to the brick gable copings, etc.?
Yours faithfully,
SPINLOVE TO GRIGBLAY
Dear Sir, 18.2.25.
You are right in understanding that the whole of the brick cills, heads, and weatherings are to be cut to show equal widths and uniform ½ in. joints. I do not agree that you are entitled to an extra for this work, which is required under the general condition that all work shall be of the best quality.
Yours faithfully,
BRASH TO SPINLOVE
Dear Mr. Spinlove, 18.2.25.
At long last, after this interminable period, I have received counsel’s opinion on the proposal you suggested for making use of the spring; I append a copy as its perusal may interest you. I have conferred with my legal adviser on the appropriate action to be taken and I desire you will be so good as to wait upon Messrs. Russ, when you have made your arrangements, and inform those gentlemen of the work contemplated, as they anticipate they may wish to take counsel’s opinion again, for I consider it advisable to make things secure and not to incur any liability of a lawsuit or to be compelled to dismantle the arrangements after they are instituted.
I should mention that it is not desired that attention should be attracted to the operations, and I apprehend that when the work is completed there will be nothing visible to see. Perhaps it would be desirable to direct the work to be performed during the night.
I am considerably indebted to you for propounding the suggestion for utilizing the spring. Will you please arrange for the necessary sample of water to be procured for analysis, if this precaution has not yet been safeguarded. I am informed that the receptacle should be thoroughly cleansed before the water is enclosed, to avoid contamination.
Yours sincerely,
(ENCLOSURE) OPINION
Re Rallingbourne v. Sir Leslie Brash
1. The Defendant is not entitled to use the spring in Honeywood Spinney of which he is the owner for any purpose that will interfere with the natural pure flow of the stream on to the Plaintiff’s land injuriously to the Plaintiff and in addition is bound to maintain such pure natural flow.
2. Any building or works extending into the stream is prima facie an encroachment upon Plaintiff’s rights and is a cause of action in respect to the possible consequences to the pure natural flow without the necessity for Plaintiff proving actual injurious interference or proving the probability of any particular specified damage by such interference the onus being upon the Defendant to show that no act or omission to perform any act by or in his behalf or with or without his knowledge by any person in his employ or otherwise does in fact amount to interference with the pure natural flow and also that the said acts or omissions have not and cannot in the nature of things have any perceptible injurious effect upon the natural flow of the stream. cf. Bickett v. Morris L.R. 1 Ap.47 L. Blackburn. Orr-Ewing v. Colquhoun L.R. 2 Ap. ca. 853.
3. Having regard to the facts in this case I am clearly of opinion that the Defendant will be able to show that his installation of a ram as proposed can in no perceptible degree obstruct pollute or diminish the pure natural flow of the stream on to the Plaintiff’s land and that therefore an action for breach of covenants cannot be successfully maintained. cf. Per Cur Rhodes v. Airedale Commiss: L.R. 1 C.P.D. 392 45. L.I.C. P. 341.
(Sg) geoffrey chawlegger,
2 Midden Court,
Inner Temple.
So help you!
GRIGBLAY TO SPINLOVE
Dear Sir, 19.2.25.
We regret that we cannot agree to gauge brick cills and weatherings. No gauged work is described in the specification or measured in the quantities, and our price does not cover for it.
We may say that in all our experience we have never been called upon to gauge in work of this character. We are accustomed to turn out brickwork which will equal the best done anywhere and to the satisfaction of leading architects, and we will pick the bricks and keep the joints as near to ½ in. as no matter, and we believe that this will meet with your satisfaction. If anything more is required, payment for extra time and waste must be allowed us.
Yours faithfully,
This is a perfectly right and reasonable view of the matter.
SPINLOVE TO GRIGBLAY
Dear Sir, 21.2.25.
It is you who have introduced the description “gauged brick work.” I have not asked for it. I am not concerned with what is included in the quantities; the bills are not part of the contract and any question arising out of them must be settled between Mr. Tinge and yourselves.
Yours faithfully,
Spinlove is right in what he says of the quantities, which have no place in the contract except as a schedule of prices fixing rates at which any variation shall be valued, but he is perfectly wrong in every other particular. His letter is lamentable in its arrogant disregard of the builder’s point of view, and his requirements are childish. What he asks for is, in point of fact, not gauged work—for gauged work is a particular process employed with particular bricks—but his demand is akin to it, and a special clause in the specification could alone entitle him to make the demand.
GRIGBLAY TO SPINLOVE
Dear Sir, 23.2.25.
We beg to say that we are perfectly aware the bills are not part of the contract, but if your requirements for gauging the cills, etc., were included in your specification Mr. Tinge would have measured the item, and the fact that he has not done so supports our contention that the work is not included in the contract. We have given special instructions to Bloggs re this work and have no doubt that it will give you satisfaction, but we cannot handle the cills as gauged work without being allowed the extra price, which we are willing to agree with Mr. Tinge.
Yours faithfully,
SPINLOVE TO TINGE
Dear Mr. Tinge, 24.2.25.
I enclose copies of correspondence with Grigblay on the subject of brick cills and weatherings. Surely the general requirement of “work to be of the best description” and “to the architect’s satisfaction,” includes this necessary cutting and jointing?
Yours faithfully,
TINGE TO SPINLOVE
Dear Sir, 26.2.25.
We did not measure any gauged work nor describe any special labours in cills of the kind you describe, as such work was not asked for in your specification nor shown in the drawings.
Yours faithfully,
We probably admire Tinge’s pithy style more than Spinlove, who wants to have his view of Grigblay’s obligations. That, however, has nothing to do with Tinge; it is a point for the decision of that tremendous person widely known as “the Harshtec.” Spinlove evidently did not know how to reply to Grigblay, for there is no letter on the file. He has obviously allowed his mind to be obscured by his drawing-board, which has presented to him a problem that, in practice, does not exist. Spinlove (who cannot lay bricks) has been trying to show a bricklayer (who can) how to lay them by representing bricks and their joints as equal rectangular blocks with straight edges ranged out with dividers. The resources of the craftsman are out of mind for the draughtsman; the problems presented by set-square and dividers do not exist for the craftsman.
SPINLOVE TO WREEK & CO
.,
SANITARY SPECIALISTS
Dear Sirs, 28.2.25.
I enclose layout of drains for house near Marlford, with contours, and shall be glad if you will let me have a scheme for sewage disposal. Before you do so, however, I should like you to see the subsoil and discuss things with you, preferably on the site. Will Tuesday next suit you? I shall be travelling by the 2.5 from Charing Cross on that day.
Yours faithfully,
WREEK & CO
.
TO SPINLOVE
Dear Sir, 2.3.25.
We duly received your esteemed communication, with plan, and we will have pleasure in arranging for our Mr. Peter Schwarb to place himself at your entire personal disposal and visit the site in your good company on Tuesday next, as per your letter.
As one of our fleet of motors is available on that day we shall be favoured if we may be allowed to place it at your personal disposal, and would arrange for Mr. Schwarb to call for you at one o’clock at your office, or any other place or hour convenient to your good self, for the purpose of personally escorting you to and from the site.
We are, dear Sir,
Your obedient servants,
Wreek & Co. evidently believe in “personal charm as a commercial asset,” and by “personal charm” they appear to understand a fawning sycophancy directed to establish in the charmed one a sense of obligation which shall make it difficult for him to reject their proposal, question their price, or condemn their performance. To experience three hours boxed up in a motor with Mr. Schwarb’s unflinching personal charm—sublimed, perhaps, with a touch of scent—will probably settle Spinlove’s hash, or, on the other hand, perhaps it will not. The needs of personal charm have, we may guess, led Mr. Schwarb to scheme to join Spinlove at lunch and pay for both; and, at a hint, it would probably find him ready to carry the architect upstairs on his back and put him to bed.
SPINLOVE TO WREEK & CO
.
Dear Sirs, 3.3.25.
As I understand you are motoring down to Marlford on Tuesday I shall be glad to accept a seat in your car. I will expect it after lunch at 1.30.
Yours faithfully,
One cannot here altogether regret the graceless style Spinlove adopts to those under his direction, but although the insincerity of Wreek’s obsequious letter smells strongly, there is no reason why Spinlove should not thank them on the frank assumption that the intention is to save their own, and his, time.
