1st may 1899
Letter from P. MacGregor Chalmers, I.A. Architect to Lady Stewart
95 Bath Street,
Glasgow
1st May, 1899
Dear Lady Stewart,
W. Purdie the Mason has just sent me a note to say he has learned that the setting of the whinstone will be more difficult than he at first anticipated. He adds 3/- to his former price of 5/- for dressing the face of the stones square. This addition makes his total estimate £3195.16/-.
I remain
Yours faithfully,
P. MacGregor Chalmers
3rd may 1899
Letter from P. MacGregor Chalmers, I. A. Architect to Sir Mark Stewart
95 Bath Street,
Glasgow
3rd May 1899
Sir Mark J. McT. Stewart, Bart, MP
My dear Sir,
Many thanks for your kind note. The cost of the church has greatly surprised me and has given me very great concern. I have not ceased to think of the matter - I thought it right to send the statement of cost just as it came from the tradesmen's schedules, knowing that I should receive directions from you as to the limit of cost which must be imposed.
I find it will save only £145 to finish the walls outside with arder(?) lime Rough cast. When I think so, I am sure that you would wish me to say that I would greatly regret the use of Rough cast on this church. I have gone over the schedules most carefully in anticipation of your note and have found it to be a most difficult thing to find any way of reducing the cost which would not seriously interfere with the design. I tried reducing the size of the building but this made little difference as the features in which is most of the cost, (doors, windows, arches etc) were still retained.
I also saw that to take something like £1000 off the cost required the cutting out of all the features (transepts, baptistry etc) which were added to the first sketch which included only a nave and small chancel. It then occurred to me that it would be infinitely better to leave the church as it is and to omit the belfry stage of the tower and the spire. I am confident that it is the wisest course to do the church in the nicest way possible at present, making everything complete and of the best material. That is how they did the work in the old days - and I do not think anyone could say that the church was imperfect because it wanted the spire. This might be added at some other time when work was not so expensive. I am not to build the spire at Carnoustie just now - and most of our spires here in Glasgow have been built at a later time than the church. I enclose a tracing of the gable elevation. If you cover the spire with paper you will see what the effect of leaving out the spire is like.
I have extracted the cost of this belfry stage of tower and the spire from the lowest schedules, and I find it will save £846 to omit this work. By following this course you will have the church just as it was approved. As I mentioned in my previous note it will save £24 to use Prudham stone instead of whin for the outside face of the walls. I like whinstone for the outside but I think I would like a church finished outside and inside with freestone better.
I have sent all the lowest offers to the measurer to be checked in their calculations, in order to save any trouble hereafter. Purdie the mason sent a supplementary note adding 3/- per yard to his price (5/-) for the whinstone walling. I sent the note of this to Lady Stewart at Ardwell but probably it has been forwarded to London.
I remain
Yours faithfully
P MacGregor Chalmers
8th may 1899
Letter from P. MacGregor Chalmers, I.A. Architect to Lady Stewart
95 Bath Street,
Glasgow
8th May, 1899
Dear Lady Stewart,
I have sent a wire to Mr McGarva to forward to you the plans of the church which he had for the use of the tradesmen in estimating. I have only the working drawings here.
My suggestion, in order to reduce the cost to some thing near the cost which I knew you had in your mind, was to cut off the tower at the level of the sill of the Belfry windows and to leave the tower manifestly unfinished. I was very loathe to suggest any interference with the general design, which I know is my best work as yet, and I am always loathe to suggest the use of inferior materials in a church. I am very confident from former and frequent experience that a work which is well carried out in good material and with good workmanship has a far finer look to the cultured eye, even although the work is incomplete, than another work complete in all its parts, yet cheaply and poorly executed - and there is something nice in leaving work for other days or other hands.
I think I would grudge every penny spent upon a temporary belfry. I wonder if I would not grudge it more upon a belfry which did not meet one's highest idea. If a belfry stage is needed, it must rise well over the level of the ridge of the nave roof. Would it do to retain the present design of the Belfry windows and only to omit the sloping spire? A sloping slated pyramid roof could take the place of the spire. I have taken out the cost of this present belfry stage and I find that the cost is £340. The slated roof would cost £40 or £50 more, another suggestion would be to place a lead roof on the top of the tower and erect a narrow pointed spirelet in the centre. This I show on sketch. I fear that the suggested retention of the belfry stage does not meet your wishes regarding the cost and it is in my desire to keep to the sum mentioned that I would advocate the cutting off of the belfry stage and the covering in of the lower part of the tower with a flat roof.
I have gone over the schedules very carefully and I see some chance of making other savings in the course of the work. But I would wish to discount these savings, for the present, since I know there may be some extra work required of which I do not know at present.
I shall keep an eye upon the cost all through. What I would like now is to know the limit of cost. I think I can manage to keep within this.
I remain
Yours faithfully
P. MacGregor Chalmers
20th march 1901
Letter from P. MacGregor Chalmers, I.A. Architect to Lady Stewart
95 Bath Street,
Glasgow
20th March 1901
Dear Lady Stewart,
The Communion Table was not made. It was my intention, had you not approved of the designs of any of the work sent to you, to have taken all the care and trouble necessary to make the material already provided suitable and serviceable. The material for the table is in hands (Leeds?) and was at the carvers, but I immediately called on the carvers when I got your first note, and got all work stopped. I have very little doubt that I shall be able to have a design prepared which will not entail anything but the most trifling loss, if any. I shall be pleased if your Ladyship will give me some suggestion regarding the table, and I shall try to work it into a design. There will be a top, and a cornice, and a base, and posts at the corners, with some divisions across the front I hope.
I would like to have a [drawing]
little open tracing at the top of the 3 panels.
I do not think anything, to be suitable for the church, could be simpler. The sketch above shows the three panels open. I would like the middle panel filled in but I am no more inclined to press this upon your Ladyship, as essential, than you know I am to press for the retention of the four figures. I have designed a good many tables now and have never used the same design twice over. I am anxious to try another design using all the material provided, if possible.
It is sometimes thought well to place a little matting at chairs where the floor is of stone or tiles but I daresay hassocks will serve the purpose. I will not order any curtains for the windows. Perhaps the two pews not required in nave could be placed in the "organ" transept and could be used by the choir. That would perhaps be better than placing one of the pews in the other transept beside the chairs.
I am sorry you do not think the levels of the ground will work well and I shall be glad if it is in my power to help at all. It will be found that at the back the flooring joists are close down to the level of the ground at which point the damp course is laid in the wall. I received a note of the levels and my working drawings were all made out to these. But it occurs to me that if the slope of the carriage way is turning out a little too great that a step could perhaps be added at the foot of the short flight. I am hopeful that when the grounds are finished the building will look well placed.
I am
Yours faithfully
P. MacGregor Chalmers