sult was that the architect was bound by the letter which he had written, and was unable to collect the amount of his bill, as rendered. If he had given a moment's additional thought to his letter, and seen to it that it was exact in its terms and in accordance with his intentions, he would have saved a considerable amount of money. The cases where careless or thoughtless letter writing is responsible for loss might be multiplied almost indefinitely. The remedy in all cases, however, is the same, namely, to take more care with your written records, whether in the form of letters or otherwise; to place nothing in writing, unnecessarily, and, on the other hand, to place in written form, carefully checked and prepared, all those really essential matters on which written evidence is desirable. CHAPTER II. THE CONTRACT BETWEEN ARCHITECT AND CLIENT Contract determines the rights of the parties.-Importance of clear understanding and written contract.-Various forms of contract.-Agreements-express and implied.-Provisions with respect to architect's compensation and computation thereof.Commissions and allowances on furnishings and the like.Relations between architect and consulting architects and decorators. Payment of fee in corporate stock. - It is manifest that the contract between the architect and his client, whether it be oral or in writing, forms the basis of their relationship and becomes the determining factor in the establishment of their respective rights and obligations. There is no room for argument, in my opinion, with respect to the desirability and entire practicality of the use by the architect of a written contract as a regular thing in the practice of his profession. A contract which is verbal, in whole or in part, is open to misconstruction and to uncertainty from the beginning. Granting that each of the parties is entirely sincere and strictly honest, the human memory is necessarily imperfect and, after the lapse of time especially, disagreements as to the terms which were determined upon will inevitably arise. In referring, therefore, to the contract between the architect and his client, I should be understood as speaking of the written contract, which is the only really worth while form of agreement for the determination of questions as important as those involved in the building operation, and in the mutual rights and obligations of the owner and of the architect whom he chooses to act for him. For some years, I have made a practice of noting the various problems which have been presented to my architect clients in the practice of their profession, and the various difficulties with which they have met in carrying out the work which they have undertaken. There are certain fundamentals which apply almost without exception to the relationship of any architect with any client. There are other problems peculiar to the practice of the individual architect which may not be encountered generally by others of his profession. The ideal contract, from the point of view of the protection of the architect's interest, is that contract only which will cover in the fullest detail, and in the broadest way, all problems which are likely to be presented in his dealings with the client and discount the future to the fullest possible extent. In some cases, the adoption of a contract of this character may not be practical and, in order to secure the execution of a contract by the client, a less formidable form of contract is necessary. To cover these varying conditions, I prepared for clients, some time ago, what, for purposes of differentiation, I have called the "long form" contract, the "short form" contract, and the "intermediate form" of contract. The long form, so-called, is a full form providing, as far as possible, for all contingencies which may occur and covering the rights and relationships of the parties in detail. Its form, however, is kept as simple as possible. In its printed form it is on one sheet of paper. The face of the paper, where the signatures are placed, carries only a few lines, reciting that the owner has employed the architect to perform the services in question-outlining these very briefly-for the commission specified and that the architect has undertaken the work, all in accordance with the terms and conditions printed on the reverse side of the paper. On the reverse, preferably in comparatively fine type, so that they may all be included on the one sheet, are all of the general conditions of the contract covering the matters of compensation, agency, extras, estimates of cost, supervision, the employment of a clerk of the works, and all of the other points which conceivably may be involved before the completion of the work covered by the contract. Although care has been taken, as stated, to make this contract appear as simple and innocuous as possible, there are now and then, inevitably, clients who are not willing to sign it, because of the number of the conditions which it carries, but who are both willing and glad to sign a much simpler form of contract. For these cases, the second and so-called short form of contract has been prepared. It contains a few lines reciting the employment of the architect and then incorporates, as a part of the agreement, by reference merely and without setting them forth at length, the terms and provisions of the Schedules of Practice and Charges and Canons of Ethics of the American Institute, as modified, if such be the case, by the Schedule of Charges of the Local Chapter of the Institute. There are a number of important points which the schedules and canons of ethics do not cover and, as to these, this short form contract is consequently silent. Nevertheless, it has been found to serve a most useful purpose and is immeasurably better than no contract in writing. It would be a captious client indeed who would take any offense at the request that he sign it. Another form of contract lies in its scope about midway between the long form and the short form contracts. It covers specifically the more important points upon which the architect should be protected and then incorporates, by reference, the Schedule of Charges and Canons of Ethics of the Institute, so far as they are not inconsistent with the specific recitals already made. This contract can readily be included on one side of an ordinary office sheet of paper, and will, in all likelihood, cover successfully the majority of cases arising in the practice of the architect. It is usually the odd case which creates difficulties, however, and there can be no question that the long form contract is the form which should be adopted wherever this course is practicable. I believe that in about eighty per cent of the cases arising in the practice of the ordinary architect, the client will sign the long form contract, without question, and that in practically all of the remaining twenty per cent of the cases, he will gladly sign either the short form contract or the intermediate form, to which I have last referred. These contracts are printed in moderate quantities and held in the office of the architect for whom they are prepared, ready for use when required. Wherever circumstances are such that the long form may be used, it is employed. Where this is not practical, the intermediate or short form contract is relied upon. In the case of one large office that I have particularly in mind as I write, the firm has not once had occasion to resort to legal proceedings since it has adopted as a regular policy the use of the written contract with its clients. The contracts have been accepted by the clients, as a matter of course, and the clients have, I think, been favorably impressed by the business-like character of the proceeding. It is needless to say that there is nothing in any of these contracts unfair to the client. The agreements merely give definite and concrete expression to the terms upon which the parties, in fairness to each of them, should proceed, instead of leaving these terms to conjecture and inference, and so inviting disputes and misunderstanding. If a client is the kind who |