GRIGBLAY TO SPINLOVE
Dear Sir,10.11.26.
What Mr. Pricehard says is pretty much what I feared. Of course there is some stupid thing been done somewhere and it will be a job to find out where, for what has happened is that fumes from the heating furnace get into the hollow of the outside walls, and one of those places it gets out again is, in my opinion, where the joists of upper floors bear on the 4 1/2-in. inner thickness of outside walls, and so lets the air be drawn from the hollow into the space between joists and through joints of flooring into the bedrooms. I have had a look at the plans and you will find that those particular bedrooms is just where it can get; for the joists in those rooms run across to the outer wall and not parallel with it; and another thing that fixes it is the way these fumes came on worse than before when the heating furnace was started up again a few weeks ago, for as the work dried out in the summer the ends of joists, where they were built in, would shrink and leave a bit more room for the fumes to leak through than when the work was newly finished. The joints of flooring will not lie so close now, either. Well, we know the fault is in the heating flue, for the complaints stopped just when the fire was drawn for the summer; but where the fault is, and what to look for, is the difficulty—unless we open up the flue till we find out. I have never had the like of this happen in any building of mine. None of my bricklayers would play hanky-panky with a chimney flue or leave out a brick, which is what looks like; and Bloggs would not let them if they tried it. However, there cannot be many places where a little thing wrong would make all that difference, and Bloggs will be likely to say. I have written him to-day.
Yours faithfully,
Here, then, is the explanation of the famous “defective drains”—otherwise “odoriferous effluviums”; but the defect giving rise to the nuisance is still a mystery; for carelessness which would leave an opening from a chimney flue into a hollow wall-space would seem impossible of men employed by a builder of Grigblay’s standing, or in work overlooked by Bloggs.
The subtlety with which smoke will find its way through brickwork has long ago established the parging—or plastering—of the interior of flues, and until quite recently the parge was always worked up with a proportion of cow dung which prevented it from developing cracks as a lime and sand rendering is apt to do. Fifty years ago bricklayers began to resist using this traditional parge—probably because its composition seemed ignominious; and as the mortar in which the bricks are laid, now commonly used to parge the flues, seems to be all that is required, it may well be that the traditional parge was, like so many craft-methods, a survival of an immemorial custom.
BRASH IS FOILED
BRASH TO SPINLOVE
Now Mr. Spinlove,12.11.26.
I desire that you will be so obliging as to carefully peruse the enclosed copy of a letter I yesterday received from Mr. Russ anent Riddoppo, and of correspondence therein referred to, which I transmit herewith preparatory to your meeting me for the purpose of discussing the position of affairs on an early day. You will observe that I refrain from all comment. Such views as I have to communicate are, I apprehend, more fit to be the subject of verbal rather than of literary intercourse; but you may tell that infernal scoundrel Grigblay that if he or any of his damned workmen put so much as their noses inside my gate I will have them thrown out into the road.
Yours sincerely,
P.S.—Pray excuse a pardonable asperity of diction.
(ENCLOSURE) RUSS AND CO., SOLICITORS, TO BRASH
Dear Sir, 10.11.26.
In accordance with the instructions you gave Mr. Russ in your interview with him on 28th September, we entered into communication with Messrs. the Riddoppo Coy., Ltd. (and Reduced), and subsequently, on receipt of the Company’s reply, with Mr. Marston Grigblay, and we enclose copy of the correspondence.
Wore we received the letter from Mr. Grigblay’s solicitors, of 3rd October, it came to our knowledge that a receiving order had been made out against the Riddoppo Coy. The firm is in and from information in our possession we are of the opinion that reorganization is extremely unlikely; that the assets will be sold for the benefit of the debenture holders, and that there will be little or nothing left for the unsecured creditors. In the circumstances we do not consider the company worth powder and shot.
In view of the position Mr. Grigblay takes and the difficulty of showing him to be responsible without the evidence of the Riddoppo Company of the soundness of the paint supplied; and in view also of the opinion given us by Mr. Chawlegger, we do not consider that you could succeed in an action against Mr. Grigblay. It seems to us, therefore, that the only course for you to take is to withdraw.
Yours faithfully,
So the end of this matter is that, for his sins, poor old Brash is left high and dry. Riddoppo, Ltd. (and Reduced) has gone bankrupt, a fate that overtakes not a small number of such ventures and which offers an additional reason why architects should be wary in experimenting in untried materials. The company’s property will be sold to pay the debenture holders, creditors will get little, shareholders nothing, and the only person who is likely to have done well out of Riddoppo is perhaps Brash’s influential commercial friend Mr. Ziegfeld Swatmug, who may have bought the rights from the inventor for a small sum, sold them to the public for a large one, and afterwards resigned from the board of directors and disposed of his holding.
(ENCLOSURE 1) RUSS TO SECRETARY, RIDDOPPO COY.
Dear Sir, 30.9.26.
We are instructed by Sir Leslie Brash, of Honeywood Orange, MarIford, Kent, that certain paint manufactured and supplied by your Company to Mr. John Grigblay, builder, of MarIford, for the decoration of Honeywood Grange, has proved seriously defective; and have to say that unless you can make satisfactory explanation showing the said defects not to be due to any fault in the paint you supplied or, alternatively, will at once give an undertaking to restore, renew or repaint as may be necessary for the proper completion of the work, we are instructed to take you for breach of warranty.
Yours faithfully,
(ENCLOSURE 2) RIDDOPPO TO RUSS
Dear Sir,2.10.26.
The paint we supplied to Mr. Grigblay a year ago, which we understand is the cause of complaint, was our well-known Mew Novelty Riddoppo, Super-Paint (Matt) and was in perfect condition as taken out of stock and same as supplied to others. We can demonstrate the superior quality of our Riddoppo Super-Paint, and produce evidence of painting carried out with taken from our stock before and after same supplied to Grigblay.
The defects are due to neglect of painters to follow instructions which we now enclose as sent to Mr. Grigblay and all others and clearly printed on the tins.
We have no intention to renew defects, as same are due to neglect to follow instructions, and not to Riddoppo Superand which is no business of ours.
Yours faithfully,
(ENCLOSURE 2A) PRINTED LEAFLET
NEW NOVELTY “RIDDOPPO” SUPER-PAINT
IMPORTANT See the word “RIDDOPPO” (with 2 “d’s” and 2 “p’s”) on every tin. NO OTHER GENUINE and if noticed should be informed at once.
N.B. These instructions must be followed if best results desired.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR USING RIDDOPPO
1. Use at a temperature of 55 degrees or over which should not be less than 40 degrees but in damp weather a higher temperature gives best results particularly for last.
2. Keep air-tight lid hermetically sealed and well stir before transferring and at once replace.
3. If copper-bound tools are used must be protected as RIDDOPPO acts as solvent and same may affect appearance.
4. All tools to be used first immerse and thoroughly cleanse in “RIDOP” (pink tin) supplied with all orders only after careful drying.
5. No paint must on any account be returned but specially in damp weather and if left overnight to be removed from pot carefully cleansed after with “RIDOP” (pink tin) before ‘same is again re-used.
6. As damp takes longer to dry close
windows or similarly open and shade from sun if same is not.
7. If ropy add “RIDOP” (pink tin) unless affected by frost though only a small amount and not otherwise or results will be unsatisfactory.
ALL TINS ARE THE PROPERTY OF THE RIDDOPPO COMPANY WHICH WHEN NOT RETURNED WILL BE CHARGED 2s.
(Issued by Riddoppo Lid.)
———
The seven golden rules of Riddoppo!
One disadvantage of a Public School and University education (however lightly faced) is that it prevents a man from understanding directions, such as these, which offer no difficulties to Bloggs and his painters, and which Grigblay could probably read aright if he stood on his head to do it.
(ENCLOSURE 3) RUSS TO GRIGBLAY
Dear Sir, 4.10.26.
We are instructed by Sir Leslie Brash to point out that certain painting carried out by you at Honeywood Grange under your contract has developed serious defects, which you have declined to remedy after being required to do so.
The Riddoppo Company, who manufactured and supplied the paint in question, state that it was taken from stock and was in perfect condition, as supplied to other customers, and sent you full instructions for applying the paint, which instructions were also printed on the tins.
We are instructed to inform you that unless you can show that the failure of the paint-work is not due to defective workmanship or other fault for which you are responsible; or, alternatively, will give an undertaking immediately to restore or renew the defective paintwork to the satisfaction of the Sir Leslie Brash intends to have the necessary renovations carried out by some other person and to deduct the such renovations, together with certain expenses he has cost of already incurred as a result of the defects, from the balance of moneys retained by him as security for the completion of your contract.
Yours faithfully,
(ENCLOSURE 4) GLAUBER AND WALSH (SOLICITORS) TO RUSS
Sir, 8.10.26.
Our client, Mr. John Grigblay, instructs us to say, in reply to, your letter to him of 4th October, that he strongly objected to use Riddoppo paint and only did so to oblige your client after receiving the written undertaking of the architect that yaw client accepted full responsibility for the result of the experiment; that he placed his foreman painter in charge of the work and employed only skilled decorators upon it; that the instructions supplied with the paint were exactly followed, or if not exactly followed, then followed as exactly as the ambiguous and confused wording made them possible to be understood or, if understandable, then as exactly as painters and decorators can, or could be expected to understand and follow them; or if the said instructions were not ambiguous, then that they were redundant and fastidious and such as no practical men could observe, or if they were not, then that no warning of such defects as have occurred was given, so that these defects tie not due to any failure to observe instructions, if clear instructions were given, which my client denies, but were due to the omission of warnings of dangers of which my client could have no knowledge as the paint was composed of “new and secret ingredients.”
Furthermore, my client’s case is that the said instructions are worded and designed to be, and in fact are, a mere device to enable Riddoppo to shelter themselves from liability for defects in their paint; which paint my client has evidence to prove is generally discredited by the building trade as a worthless imposture.
I am further instructed to say that my client contends that he has carried out his contract to paint in a skilful and workmanlike manner, and that he refuses to renovate or restore or renew or have anything more to do with any painting at Honeywood of any kind whatsoever or for any consideration whatsoever; and that my client regards the threat of an action by your client as the malicious attempt of a rich man to bully and browbeat a poor one, and win defend any action which your client may bring, to his last penny.
Yours faithfully,
(Here ends the correspondence enclosed by Russ to Brash.)
As Grigblay said—” There are others who can employ solicitors besides Sir Leslie Brash.”
GRIGBLAY TO SPINLOVE
Dear Sir, 12.11.26.
As promised, we wrote to our foreman Bloggs on the subject of the run of the furnace flue, and his report is as follows:
“She start off left hand pretty quick but only as far as the top of fire lump at back. . . . Then she make a sudden turn and rise up straight, but going away backwards eight courses I reckon or may be ten, till she have nine inches to face of cellar wall. . . .”
Bloggs says this was done by your orders to prevent wine from getting chilled, and that it made the flue very tight just above to that he had difficulty in getting it over. He goes on:
“After that she start off and away she go left hand over the door of fuel and past soot door tiff that girder under kitchen hearth stop her; but she just lean over right hand to clear and off she go again nice and easy right up to stalk and a good one for a brush all the way after she pass the soot door. She was a bit tight below I admit, but I did the best I could and she and draw a treat and so I left her and do not trouble can be since.”
We are afraid the above does not help us much, but. Mr. Grigblay is arranging to go over to Honeywood with the plans
Grigblay on Thursday and see what he can make.
Yours faithfully,
It is apparent that Blogg’s authentic chirp is in part lost to us by the editorial conscience of the typist. I picture the omitted passages as recording Bloggs’ views of the architect’s demands.
He speaks of the flue as “she” out of respect and affection for flies, and for somewhat different reasons than when he used the same word to designate Lady Brash.
SPINLOVE TO BRASH
Dear Sir Leslie Brash, 14.11.26.
I have been away from the office on important business and found your letters of the 8th and 12th awaiting me on my return yesterday.
I am very sorry to hear of the building activities and really do not know what to advise. I am afraid however, that no question of infringement of your copyright arises. In the case of the block of cottages you proposed to build last year, the entire plan—which was the material part of the design—was, you say, “purloined”; but I do not think there can be any copyright in an architectural feature, and though the villas may imitate, they cannot attempt to reproduce any part of your house. I am afraid, too, that you have no copyright in the word “Honeywood,” as it is a place-name which was in use long before you adopted it.
As regards the proposed bungalow allotments, I do not know what to say. The only thing seems to be to buy the people out. It was, I think, considerate of them to give you the opportunity of acquiring the land. They perhaps thought you might not like to have buildings of that kind close up to your boundary.
I have received the analyst’s report. He says the smells are due to fumes from the heating furnace. These must somehow get into the space of the hollow walls and are by that means distributed to remote parts of the house. I cannot understand in the least how this has happened. However, Mr. Grigblay has agreed to make no charge for putting things right, as it is a defect for which he is responsible.
I was sorry to learn the result of your negotiations for settlement of the Riddoppo dispute. I have always felt, as you know, that Grigblay could not be held responsible in view of his objection to the paint and of his consenting to use it only after you accepted responsibility for the result. This was also Mr. Chawlegger’s view, you will remember, and now Mr. Russ evidently feels the same about it. It will be impossible for me to see you this week, but I will ring up early next week and arrange a meeting. I am extremely busy just now.
You asked me some time ago to let you have particulars of my charges. These I now have the pleasure of enclosing.
Yours sincerely,
This letter seems to have been written on one of the very worst of Spinlove’s “bad days.” Except for the directions it gives Brash on the matter of copyright, it is futile to the point of exasp
eration. If he had no advice to give he should have said so, instead of elaborating vacuity. Brash is well aware that he has acquired no rights in the word “Honeywood”; that he can rescue himself by “buying the people out,” and that the one entirely impossible explanation of the proposal made him by Snitch is consideration for his feelings or his interests.
Spinlove’s comment on the Riddoppo fiasco—”I always told you so”—and his bland assumption that the whole nuisance of the smells is satisfactorily disposed of by Grigblay’s putting it right “without charge” is the very cream of tactlessness; and why he should choose this occasion of all others to tell Brash, twice over, that he is too busy to give him full attention, and to send him particulars of his charges, is beyond understanding.
As regards this matter of architectural copyright, it is only in recent years that the thing has been recognized in English Law, and there have not been enough judgments to determine how the Courts apply the text of “colourable imitation”—which establishes infringement-to plans, elevations, and architectural features. There are, however, from time to time claims by architects whose published designs for small houses have been adopted by private building-owners. Such claims are usually settled by the author of the design being paid the fees he would have earned as architect for the work, and the making of them must be among the most lucrative activities of architectural practice: but the generality of architects have a natural repugnance to taking advantage of simple souls whose attachment to the great ideal of something for nothing has been a little too fervid.
Honeywood Settlement Page 18