HF 
 
 IRLF 
 
(Second Edition.) 
 
 WRIGHT ON BUILDING 
 ARBITRATIONS 
 
 A MANUAL FOR ARCHITECTS, STUDENTS, 
 CONTRACTORS AND CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERS 
 
 BY 
 G. ALEXANDER WRIGHT 
 
 (Member San Francisco Chapter American Institute of Architects ; Member 
 Technical Society of the Pacific Coast; author of "Wright on Quantities"). 
 
 (By Mail, One Dollar) 
 
Preface to Second Edition 
 
 The first edition of this little Manual appeared in May, 1894, 
 and consisted principally of an Address upon the subject of 
 Building Arbitration given by me before the Technical Society 
 of the Pacific Coast. Having good reason for believing that my 
 layman-like efforts had proved of service to some who for the 
 first time found themselves occupying the position of Building 
 Arbitrator, I was prompted some years later to revise my earlier 
 work and to add some other information and data, including 
 several Forms for the Arbitrator's use. My spare time being 
 limited, this was not finally accomplished until early in 1906, 
 and, unfortunately, my manuscript was then destroyed by the 
 conflagration of April 18th to 21st, in that year, since which 
 time I have had only an occasional opportunity of again pro- 
 ceeding with my task. 
 
 "Building Arbitrations" is not a law book in any sense of 
 the word, nor is it intended to be used as such. The principles 
 of Arbitration are, however, not difficult for the layman to 
 understand, and my aim has been to compile and codify the 
 facts in a common-sense and convenient form, with such infor- 
 mation as will enable the Architect, the Contractor and the 
 Engineer to act intelligently, and in order, when it becomes 
 necessary, to occupy the honored position of Arbitrator or 
 Umpire without, I hope, transgressing those statutory require- 
 ments essential to a properly conducted Arbitration. 
 
 THE AUTHOR. 
 
 San Francisco, June, 1913. 
 
MANUAL 
 
 ON 
 
 BUILDING ARBITRATIONS 
 
 For the use of Architects, Students, Contractors, and Con- 
 struction Engineers, or others who may be called upon to act 
 as Arbitrator or Umpire in the settlement of disputes connected 
 with Building or Engineering Construction operations. 
 
 With the following convenient Forms, viz: 
 Form A Demanding Arbitration. 
 " B Accepting Arbitration. 
 " C Submission. 
 " D Acceptance by Arbitrators. 
 " E Acceptance by Umpire. 
 " F Notice of Hearing. 
 
 G Subpoena for Witnesses. 
 H Oath and Affirmation. 
 I_Award. 
 
 RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED BY THE AUTHOR TO HIS BROTHER ARCHITECTS, 
 AND CO-WORKERS THE CONTRACTORS AND ENGINEERS. 
 
 (Volenti non fit injuria) 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 Chap. I. Introduction. 
 
 II. Building Arbitration, Its Advantages. 
 
 III. Arbitration : Its Place in the Work of the Architect, 
 
 Contractor and Engineer. 
 
 IV. Arbitrators : Their Qualifications, Duties, Etc. 
 
 V. Submitting Matters in Dispute to Arbitration. The 
 Submission. 
 
 VI. Mode of Procedure. 
 
 " VII. The Award. 
 
 VIII. Compensation of Arbitrators and Umpire. 
 
 " IX. Convenient Forms. 
 
WRIGHT ON BUILDING ARBITRATION. 
 
 CHAPTER ONE 
 Introduction 
 
 It is scarcely possible, when considering the basic prin- 
 ciples of Arbitration, to present to the reader anything that can 
 be justly termed new or original. The following pages consist 
 principally of notes made from time to time by the Author 
 for his own guidance, with perhaps some practical suggestions; 
 also blank forms such as he has found useful in conducting 
 Building Arbitrations. The present might well be termed the 
 Arbitration Age, and it is the opinion of competent judges 
 that the arbitration of building disputes will, in the near future, 
 be more frequent and more closely allied than ever before with 
 the work of the architect, the contractor and the engineer. 
 
 Early Origin: The word "arbitration" comes to us from 
 the Latin "arbitratus" (to be a hearer) and "ar" and "betere" 
 (to go hence, one who goes to look on). This method of de- 
 termining differences between men and peoples has been prac- 
 tised from earliest times, and distinct reference to its principles 
 are found in the Scriptures. The Amphictyonic Council, organ- 
 ized 600 B. C. for the protection of the temple of Delphi and 
 the abolition of war, also proposed the accomplishment of its 
 object by arbitration, very much as we know it today. So well 
 recognized were these principles in Greece that when Sparta 
 and Argos made a treaty of alliance they provided for the 
 settlement of their disputes by arbitration, according (as we are 
 told) to a custom of their ancestors. Again, the practice of 
 Arbitration comes to us from Justinian jurisprudence, and its 
 influence may be traced throughout most civilized nations. 
 Rome, in the pride of her glory and power, acknowledged the 
 
 5 
 
good side of arbitration when Pompey directed the Parthians 
 and Armenians to regulate their differences by this means. 
 
 It is most interesting to observe also that the arbitration 
 proceedings of today differ but very little from those of the 
 ancient Greeks, for in their day it was usual to make agreements 
 designating the Arbitrator and also the matters in dispute. It 
 was the arbitrator who fixed the time and place of the investiga- 
 tion, and he was solemnly pledged to discharge his trust hon- 
 estly. The "sentence" was also written out and deposited in 
 temples and other public places, and oaths were taken by the 
 parties that they would execute the sentence imposed. 
 
 During the middle ages arbitrations seem to have been 
 more frequent, yet their beneficial influence was restrained, 
 owing to the absence among the people of the idea of con- 
 ciliation. Blackstone describes it "as a method whereby the 
 parties, injuring and injured, submit all matters in dispute con- 
 cerning any personal chattels or personal wrongs, to the judg- 
 ment of two or more arbitrators, who are to decide the con- 
 troversy, and if they do not agree, it is usual to add that another 
 person be called in as 'umpire,' to whose sole judgment it is 
 then referred, or frequently there is only one Arbitrator original- 
 ly appointed." We find in the latter case some authorities prefer 
 to use the word "arbiter," which was also used in this sense 
 under the Roman law. 
 
 Happily in modern times arbitration is still more universally 
 appreciated as a means of settling differences of every kind, 
 from those of international importance to the adjustment of the 
 manifold questions which continually affect Capital and Labor. 
 So general, indeed, is this principle that in certain States even 
 breaches of contract, trespass, assaults, charges of slander, dif- 
 ferences between partners and even breach of promise may be 
 settled by arbitration; and so the principle has come down to 
 us in an almost unbroken line from ancient times. 
 
 Referring for a moment to international arbitration, it is 
 not so long since the Emperor of Russia advocated a national 
 conference with the object of substituting its principles among 
 nations as a remedy for war. It should be a matter of pride to 
 American citizens to recall the fact that since her birth as a 
 
 6 
 
nation, the United States has ever been foremost in 'Consenting 
 to the arbitration of questions which other nations might have 
 considered a justification for bloodshed; and we find no fewer 
 than forty-seven such cases in a little over one hundred years, 
 an excellent showing indeed. And in addition to arbitrating 
 her own differences the United States has, herself, acted as 
 arbitrator between other nations upon some fourteen or more 
 different occasions, and even as we go to press the very atmos- 
 phere from the Atlantic to the Pacific appears to be charged 
 with appeals for arbitration. 
 
 CHAPTER TWO 
 Building Arbitration: Its Advantages 
 
 A BUILDING ARBITRATION in its broadest sense is, 
 we may consider, a kind of friendly tribunal substituted for a 
 regularly recognized court, and permitted by statute which is, 
 very properly, somewhat arbitrary and strict in regard to the 
 proper methods of procedure. The bringing about of arbitra- 
 tion is a voluntary act on the part of disputants, who by its 
 means select their own judges, and it becomes, when properly 
 conducted, a speedy and inexpensive, and should be a friendly 
 way of finally adjusting and determining almost any dispute 
 which may arise in connection with construction work. It must 
 not, however, be supposed by the layman that arbitration can 
 at all times take the place of the law, nor does it by any means 
 dispense with the services of the competent attorney. Indeed, 
 in unusually difficult or complicated .controversies, professional 
 legal advice as to the course of procedure is recommended, 
 particularly in the preparation of the Submission, which forms 
 an extremely important document. In such cases, too, the 
 "form" of the award (but not the actual award) should be pre- 
 pared by or under the advice of counsel. 
 
 Arbitration must appeal to honest men, and to men who 
 think right. It is not for the unprincipled, and men whose sole 
 desire is to get the best of each other. It is an honest and 
 
 7 
 
manly way to settle an honest difference between man and man. 
 The Chicago Daily Tribune of February 1, 1912, quoted the 
 recent remarks of a prominent jurist at a monthly meeting of 
 the Chicago Bar Association as follows : "The chief reasons why 
 the members were discussing the questions of reform in the 
 practice and procedure of their courts, was the demand through- 
 out the United States that legal procedure be made more effec- 
 tive, more speedy, more just." At the same meeting the presi- 
 dent read a letter expressing the views of another distinguished 
 member of the Chicago Bar, as follows: "The great and, in 
 my opinion, chief trouble with our administration of the law is 
 that a trial in court is regarded and treated as a 'battle/ in 
 which the contestants may, without loss of self-respect, use all 
 means not bordering upon the downright criminal, to gain their 
 ends, and if deemed expedient, to obstruct the cause of justice." 
 Another member present recited the simplicity of procedure in 
 Courts of Admiralty. "We proceed," said he, "as if they were 
 courts of justice. The procedure in the State Courts is such 
 an abomination that if the laymen knew as much about the 
 practice as we do, they would rise up and smite it." 
 
 Such views from authoritative lips must surely prompt the 
 technical layman to regard arbitration with still greater favor, 
 for the prompt, equitable adjustment of technical differences. 
 
 It may be of interest to note in passing that in 1911 the 
 Chamber of Commerce of New York issued a very convincing 
 pamphlet entitled "Commercial Arbitration," showing how dis- 
 putes may be adjusted without litigation, and the interested 
 reader might well procure and read this publication, which, 
 coming from so important a body, possesses a special value. 
 
 What architect, contractor or engineer is there, of any 
 mature experience, who cannot recall at least one technical case 
 which would have been better determined by the arbitration 
 of practical men rather than by a suit? Is it not safe to say 
 it would have been settled more quickly, more economically, 
 and, with all due respect for the law, more satisfactorily, per- 
 haps, to the disputants? 
 
 Just now we seem to be living in what might well be de- 
 scribed as the "Age of Arbitration," the only method, it would 
 
 8 
 
appear, of adjusting our differences. Regulated by statute as 
 it is, it results in prompt and fairly equitable settlements, and, 
 it may be said, without causing that bitterness of feeling so 
 often apparent in suits at law. It is a practical solution of the 
 difficulty which our respected judges experience in their efforts 
 to hear and determine building disputes fairly. Technical and 
 practical men, however, understand the technique of such dis- 
 putes, and can follow every point of the testimony, wherever 
 it may lead, and then reason, we may say, takes the place of 
 those technicalities which seem to be so inseparable from court 
 practice. 
 
 The author has profound respect for the painstaking judge, 
 the one who endeavors to grasp the thousand and one technical 
 points which arise in construction suits, and no disrespect what- 
 ever is intended nor inferred; but it does happen sometimes 
 that neither the court nor the disputants' attorneys have a 
 sufficiently accurate perception of the true construction or the 
 meaning of the drawings, sections, details, specifications, etc., 
 to say nothing of the usual methods of working on a structure, 
 trade customs, and other matters which most of us become fa- 
 miliar with by actual daily contact, nor, indeed, can it be ex- 
 pected they should be. It must, however, be very difficult to 
 give fair decisions without such knowledge, and so it happens 
 sometimes, notwithstanding the great skill and care displayed 
 by the court and counsel, that much of the technique in evidence 
 is but partially understood, and testimony that might be brought 
 out under a technical tribunal is lost. The expert, or rather 
 technical, witness, sometimes meets with and recognizes just 
 such conditions. 
 
 A building dispute, such as that, for example, which may 
 arise when an owner declines, for some reason, to pay for work 
 performed, may be arbitrated by the terms of the contract or 
 by subsequent mutual consent. This brings some advantages 
 immediately. There is no waiting; the "trial" commences im- 
 mediately, and quick settlement follows, the author thinks, with 
 better results than in court practice, for the reason that all the 
 facts are still fresh in the minds of the parties and their wit- 
 nesses. This very point was once well illustrated in the author's 
 
 9 
 
own practice. During the preparation of the first edition of this 
 manual he was subpoenaed to give testimony in a suit regarding 
 the quantity of certain work performed in a building. The 
 claim originally was for $400 odd. The case had been on the 
 calendar nearly three years, and the testimony on final hearing 
 was much in conflict, owing, I believe, to conscientious inability 
 on the part of the witnesses to remember just what the facts 
 were. Arbitration three years before would have saved money, 
 much time and some vexation. 
 
 Again, in court a jury is apt to attach undue importance 
 to a large number of witnesses, but a few good men of known 
 honesty and ability are more convincing to the technical arbi- 
 trator, who himself possesses that practical experience and 
 judgment essential to an equitable decision. He also knows 
 what portion and how much of such evidence may be properly 
 accepted or rejected. This is one argument in favor of arbitrat- 
 ing technical disputes, and even a stronger argument why the 
 architect, the contractor and the engineer should understand 
 the fundamental principles of Arbitration, and their application 
 in the settlement of disputes concerning their particular spheres 
 of work. Arbitration is perhaps one of the most practical of 
 subjects in the statutes, easily understood and readily applied, 
 a further knowledge of which might well form part of our pro- 
 fessional and business training, enabling us to occupy with more 
 usefulness to our fellow man and credit to ourselves, the hon- 
 ored position of technical arbitrator when the necessities of our 
 work or duty demand it. 
 
 A court trial differs, of course, from one held before tech- 
 nical judges. In the former, witnesses are always entitled to 
 be considered as truthful until proved otherwise. The Court 
 knows nothing personally of the weight which might be at- 
 tached to their technical testimony beyond that which appears 
 on the face of what has been put into words, whereas technical 
 men, or even mechanics, as witnesses, when testifying before a 
 technical tribunal would in all probability be personally known 
 by one or more of the arbitrators, and the witnesses' reputation 
 for honesty, as well as technical knowledge, could be considered 
 and placed at its real value after making such allowances as 
 
 10 
 
may seem proper. In other words, their evidence could be 
 sifted, so to speak, and a proper value attached to that which 
 was pertinent to the issues. 
 
 With an arbitration the hour and place of hearing may be 
 fixed with some regard to suit the convenience of the parties 
 and their witnesses; for example, sessions may be fixed for 
 evenings or other times out of the ordinary business hours. 
 Such a concession cannot, of course, be expected from the regu- 
 lar courts. Then, again, there is more opportunity and lati- 
 tude for producing rebuttal evidence; but in court practice, if 
 the best and strongest testimony be not produced according to 
 the rules of procedure, the opportunity of doing so may be lost. 
 Again, there is less risk of one side being overthrown by sur- 
 prise testimony, as sometimes occurs in court. Technical arbi- 
 trators have a way of getting down to the facts. They go at 
 once to the very essence of the dispute, and are not hampered 
 by precedent, cases or court rules. In short, they quickly get 
 to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, with- 
 out formality or hindrance, and are then able to render judg- 
 ment according to the testimony coupled with their own tech- 
 nical knowledge in a common-sense, business-like manner, and 
 their decisions are usually accepted in good grace by the 
 disputants. 
 
 Occasionally one hears it alleged that arbitrators may be 
 uncertain judges, admitting evidence of a certain nature at one 
 time and rejecting it at another, or that they are liable to in- 
 consistency regarding the weight of evidence presented, or 
 that they may be unduly firm and hard to convince today, and 
 yet tomorrow may be unnecessarily yielding, and so forth. 
 Care should, of course, be exercised to guard against these in- 
 consistencies. Years ago there might have been some grounds 
 for these charges, but the arbitration idea is fortunately now 
 getting such a hold on the people that the tendency to such 
 mistakes has become much modified of late years. Such ob- 
 jections certainly do not hold good where arbitrators are men 
 of experience. It is unreasonable to assert that arbitration is 
 good provided the arbitrators are perfect. Would is not be 
 equally as reasonable to assume that the courts are good only 
 if every judge is perfect? It is doubtful whether His Honor 
 
 11 
 
himself would maintain that this condition has always existed, 
 though it is very far from the author's intention to cast the 
 least reflection upon the honorable and experienced judges in 
 our courts. 
 
 There are probably cases, even with arbitration, where the 
 parties to a submission are no more satisfied with the award 
 than they would have been with a court decision after trial 
 lasting a year or two. Such dissatisfaction arises very often 
 from an incorrect estimate of the real purposes of arbitration, 
 but this neither proves nor disproves anything. Some parties 
 may occasionally cherish a grievance unless they are awarded 
 the whole or nearly all of whatever they choose to claim, but 
 this in no way affects injuriously the great advantage which 
 arbitration possesses over law suits in adjusting technical dis- 
 putes. Fair-minded contractors and owners (and neither are 
 as scarce as some people think) are not only usually satisfied 
 with an award of their fellows, but are more than glad to get 
 their differences so easily adjusted and so quickly off their 
 minds without resorting to an action at law, and going through 
 those experiences which such a step implies. We have but to 
 refer to the calendar to realize how frequently these technical 
 cases find their way into the courts, whereas they could be more 
 readily and more satisfactorily disposed of either in the ordinary 
 method of arbitration, or by assigning such cases, we will say, 
 to a technical referee, or by arranging for their hearing by a 
 Court of Arbitration. 
 
 In the court trial of technical suits connected with construc- 
 tion work, the best technical witnesses obtainable are in fre- 
 quent demand, and the reason is not far to seek. Indeed, the 
 author believes that the time cannot be so far distant when the 
 courts will realize the advantage of referring building and 
 similar technical cases to competent technical judges. This 
 course prevails in some of our large cities, with much ad- 
 vantage. It also relieves the overcrowded calendars, and in this 
 way greatly facilitates the work of the courts, and the people 
 get the benefit. 
 
 The establishment of a permanent Court of Arbitration, or 
 technical tribunal, for the hearing of building and engineering 
 
 12 
 
disputes alone, would, the author believes, possess some distinct 
 advantages. Apart from controversies arising from the con- 
 tract systems, take the differences which will sometimes occur 
 between the professional man and his client; most of us know 
 something of the uncertainty of submitting such differences in 
 court to a jury of laymen. These cases should be invariably 
 adjusted by technical men familiar with custom and equity in 
 such cases. 
 
 Or, if this should be considered too sweeping a change in 
 our judiciary methods, then perhaps a particular judge might 
 be set apart, and be given a special court to try, in conjunction 
 with two or more architects, contractors or engineers (who 
 would sit in bank with him), the special classes of cases under 
 consideration. 
 
 CHAPTER THREE 
 
 Arbitration: Its Place in the Work of the Architect, Contractor 
 
 and Engineer 
 
 In no direction probably has the spread of the principles 
 of arbitration been greater in recent years than in connection 
 with the carrying out of contract building and engineering work. 
 At any time now the architect, contractor and engineer is likely 
 to be called upon to apply these recognized principles, and yet 
 it is the exception rather than the rule to find the subject even 
 mentioned in our literature upon Construction. Legal works 
 exist for the use of and reference by our friends the attorneys, 
 and the digests contain many cases and decisions arising out 
 of arbitrations more or less properly conducted, the most fre- 
 quent examples of cases consisting of the efforts of one of the 
 parties to cause the setting aside or vacation, of an award ; but 
 there seems to be very little available in an easy-for-reference 
 manner adapted to the layman's needs, and this may account, 
 in a measure perhaps, for the want of familiarity with arbitra- 
 tion methods one occasionally observes when attending arbi- 
 trations. 
 
 13 
 
No class of men, probably, are more competent on the 
 whole and technically to act as arbitrator or umpire in the 
 adjustment of building and engineering differences than the ex- 
 perienced architect, contractor or engineer, and in view of the 
 increasing popularity of arbitration along these special lines 
 of work there are increasing opportunities for the employment 
 of such technical arbitrator, and undoubtedly the demand for 
 experienced judges in this particular sphere will increase ma- 
 terially as time goes on; and consequently, upon general prin- 
 ciples, we can all with perfect consistency urge the adoption of 
 arbitration for the settlement of nearly every case of disagree- 
 ment which occurs in the carrying out of contracts, upon the 
 grounds of economy, saving of time, equitable adjustments, and 
 general expediency. 
 
 The suggestion is occasionally made that an attorney would 
 make a more satisfactory arbitrator than a layman, it being 
 alleged that a legal mind is more competent to judge as to what 
 is proper evidence and the best method of obtaining and present- 
 ing it. If technical disputants desire (which they are less in- 
 clined to do every year) their differences settled purely from the 
 legal aspect, they would not accept arbitration as readily as 
 they do. The questions which most frequently come up before 
 arbitration tribunals are not questions of law, but of fact, con- 
 troversies concerning construction, value of builders' work, 
 drawings, details, trade customs or some such matter which 
 the technical arbitrator usually has at his fingers' ends, and 
 he can therefore personally decide what is right and proper to 
 be done under varying conditions and circumstances. The author 
 has serious misgivings whether among his legal acquaintances 
 there is even one who would doubt the value of the technical 
 knowledge of the competent architect, contractor or engineer 
 when it comes to investigating and deciding upon the merits 
 of technical disputes arising in their own particular lines of 
 work. 
 
 The principles of arbitration should form part of the cur- 
 riculum of our universities, colleges and technical schools. Cer- 
 tainly peace is more important than war. It is less expensive 
 and more manly. Indeed arbitration should be more generally 
 
 14 
 
applied in all affairs among business men, when honest differ- 
 ences arise upon questions of fact. 
 
 CHAPTER FOUR 
 Arbitrators: Their Qualifications, Duties, Etc. 
 
 A disputant may nominate any person as his arbitrator, for 
 every person possesses the natural right to select whom he 
 pleases for his private judge; but in seeking to avail himself of 
 this right he should use care and discretion, such, for example, 
 as might be displayed in the selection of a juryman. The per- 
 son so selected must declare his acceptance of the office and 
 agree that he will faithfully, fully, and fairly hear the allega- 
 tions and evidence, and make a just and true award according 
 to his best understanding. 
 
 Building contracts usually provide for the appointment of 
 one arbitrator by the owner and one by the contractor, these two 
 to select a third arbitrator, or umpire. The author, however, 
 seriously questions the advisability of this method in the in- 
 terests of impartiality and justice, for there, is always the danger 
 that one, and perhaps even the second, arbitrator might assume 
 the attitude of an advocate for the party who selected him or 
 them. It would appear that if more than one arbitrator were 
 selected (in such a case jointly by both parties), it would be 
 better for the two parties to agree upon three arbitrators at 
 the outset. Then each would feel that if acting at all for the 
 parties it would be for them all equally, and the tendency some- 
 times shown towards partisanship would have no cause to exist. 
 Arbitrators must not attempt to be advocates and judges at 
 one and the same time. Where two arbitrators are unable to 
 agree and they appoint a third, or umpire, it becomes prac- 
 tically a one-man arbitration, just the same. 
 
 In matters of disputed accounts mercantile men are often 
 selected, in other cases attorneys at law. In building and en- 
 
 15 
 
gineering disputes, such as we have under consideration, the 
 logical arbitrator is the architect, contractor, or engineer, de- 
 pending upon the exact nature of the dispute. 
 
 An arbitrator's chief qualifications are honesty of purpose 
 and action, impartiality, good judgment, clear-headedness, and 
 patience, the ability to listen rather than to talk. He should 
 be absolutely free from any possible bias, open-minded, broad, 
 lenient towards the peculiarities of men. He should, when act- 
 ing as an arbitrator, be above accepting any favors, however 
 slight, and not even any part of his legitimate compensation 
 prior to the award. The accepting of hospitality or refreshments 
 from one of the parties is prejudicial, and may be sufficient to 
 justify the attempt of a dissatisfied party to upset the award. 
 All such acts are liable to misconstruction, should the matter 
 be ultimately taken into court, or otherwise, even though no 
 evil or corrupt act was intended. In short, it is highly improper 
 for arbitrators, when acting as such, to accept favors from any 
 person directly or indirectly interested, and they cannot be too 
 discreet in speech and conduct if they wish to preserve their 
 award from attack. 
 
 If a person, when asked to act as an arbitrator, has any 
 business connections with either party to the dispute, or if in 
 the least unfriendly disposed to the opposite party, it would 
 be better for him to announce the fact or decline to act. Some 
 authorities declare that an arbitrator should not be related to 
 either party; but if this is known to the other side, and no 
 objection is raised, and the nominee is otherwise disinterested 
 and competent, then there would seem to be no valid reason 
 why he should not act; and the same would apply in cases 
 where either of the parties happen to be debtors or creditors 
 of a suggested arbitrator. Building disputants should beware 
 of nominating persons already prejudiced in their favor, or 
 who may have any secret interests with either party, or if their 
 minds are already made up concerning the dispute. Indeed, 
 in such a case the subsequent proceedings would be a farce, 
 not arbitration. 
 
 Above all, in cases where the submission is made an order 
 of the court, the arbitrator should remember that he is, for the 
 
 16 
 
time being, an officer of the court. His mind must at all times 
 be open to honest conviction ; any disposition to stubbornness 
 or laxity should be carefully avoided and perhaps even more 
 so if he be called upon to act as an umpire. He should have, 
 so to speak, a semi-judicial mind, be systematic, of a practical 
 rather than of an ethereal and vacillating temperament, and be 
 guided, so far as his ability permits, by the same principles 
 which govern a jury in arriving at a verdict. The first duty 
 of an arbitrator is to qualify (see Form D) before an officer 
 of the court authorized to administer oaths, usually a notary 
 public (M. E. Church vs. Seitz, 74 Cal., 287; 15 Pac., 732). The 
 umpire, if called in, must be similarly sworn. (See also Chapter 
 Five, mode of Procedure.) 
 
 It is the arbitrator's duty to appoint a time and place of 
 hearing, to notify the parties (see Form F), to adjourn upon 
 motion as often as necessary, give due notice as to continuance 
 of the hearing, the time and place for the next hearing, and 
 so forth. Arbitrators must allow a reasonable time when fix- 
 ing a date for hearing, in order that both parties may be ready 
 to present their respective claims and testimony. 
 
 There is no place in arbitration for any Shylock practices. 
 Arbitrators should not decide until every piece of testimony has 
 been presented and considered, and they must be patient and 
 listen to all that is said. It should be borne in mind that any 
 decisions arrived at after long and patient hearings are the 
 most likely to be just, and therefore acceptable to the parties 
 in interest. Any attempt to pass judgment upon matters out- 
 side those named in the submission, or to extend the arbitrator's 
 authority beyond the terms thereof, is without legal force, and 
 if done may injure the award. The duties of an arbitrator must 
 not be delegated to a second person. If, however, the opinion 
 or knowledge of any person for example, an independent at- 
 torney, or an expert is necessary to "confirm" the arbitrator's 
 own individual opinion or understanding, it is allowable to obtain 
 such assistance, but care must be taken not to follow blindly 
 such a person's advice, opinion, or knowledge. It is in a simi- 
 lar way permissible, when necessary, for an arbitrator to fortify 
 
 17 
 
his own opinion by consulting outside parties regarding, for 
 example, matters of construction, prices, etc., but this also should 
 be done with some caution, for as a matter of principle it may 
 be dangerous to go outside for evidence, and it is usually safer 
 in the end to obtain such information by placing the persons 
 upon the witness stand in the regular way. 
 
 Any architect, building contractor or engineer who is other- 
 wise qualified, should never hesitate to act as a Building Arbi- 
 trator or Umpire. As an impartial judge between disputants, it 
 is a great compliment to be invited to fill such an honored posi- 
 tion. It is a most useful office, and he who fills it with fair- 
 ness to others is entitled to the gratitude of his fellow men, 
 entirely apart from the modest compensation which may be his. 
 
 Arbitrators should never permit parties to a submission to 
 influence them in the nomination of persons to act as umpire. 
 The selection lies with the arbitrators alone, and it makes no 
 difference whether the parties to the Submission are or not 
 satisfied with the umpire selected. And here is an important 
 point that must not be overlooked : the umpire must be selected. 
 He must not be chosen by drawing lots, nor by the tossing up of 
 a coin, nor by any other method of chance, which has before 
 now been done, when the names of two or more eligible parties 
 for umpire have been submitted. The appointment of the 
 umpire should be in writing (see Forms D and E) by agree- 
 ment between the arbitrators. 
 
 A case sometimes occurs in which arbitrators, although 
 acting in perfectly good faith, are unable to agree upon a third 
 party, especially if the umpire's appointment has been left 
 until disagreement occurs between the arbitrators. Even the 
 court itself, it seems, would be without powers to compel an 
 arbitrator to accept any particular person as an umpire. The 
 author once had such a case. The conditions were such that 
 it was impossible to agree upon an umpire. The co-arbitrator 
 was inexperienced and stubborn, and the arbitration had to be 
 ultimately abandoned; suit followed, and in due course (nearly 
 two years later) judgment was rendered in favor of my co- 
 arbitrator's side, but for about one-third of the amount which 
 
 18 
 
would probably have been awarded in any fairly conducted 
 arbitration. This, however, forms a good illustration of the 
 effects of stubbornness on the part of an arbitrator, and per- 
 sons of this particular temperament should not be nominated to 
 serve as arbitrators. 
 
 The arbitrator should not personally seek to obtain privately 
 any so-called inside information or evidence from the parties 
 or their witnesses. Should he, however, be voluntarily fur- 
 nished with any such information or message bearing upon the 
 matters under consideration, it is his duty immediately to in- 
 form his co-arbitrators on all such things. 
 
 Arbitrators will administer oaths (see Form H) to the 
 witnesses, and above all things they must act together; this 
 is imperative in all things. The majority may determine any 
 question ; in other words, two may do any legal act which three 
 have authority to do under the terms of the submission. 
 
 They must decide ALL the matters in controversy, omit- 
 ting to consider nothing, and leaving nothing in doubt or un- 
 decided. Each arbitrator should carefully study every detail 
 of the case, however small, bearing fully in mind well-known 
 trade customs and precedents if any bear upon the questions, 
 and leave nothing undone that will assist in forming a proper 
 decision. Still, it cannot be too strongly emphasized that arbi- 
 trators are not advocates, nor mediators for any one party. 
 
 The author has met inexperienced arbitrators whose sole 
 idea of their duty and position seemed to be to "fight for" and to 
 take everything in sight, or out of sight, for the party who 
 nominated them, thus violating their oath, of course, to hear 
 fairly the allegations and to make a just and true award ac- 
 cording to their understanding. Such a proceeding becomes a 
 travesty upon the true intention of arbitration. An arbitrator 
 should be selected for his integrity and honesty, and not be- 
 cause of his willingness or desire to help his friend. He is 
 chosen to do what is right or he should be. 
 
 It is not the duty of an arbitrator, after assuming his duties, 
 to suggest compromise to either party, but he must perform 
 his duties in the manner he is sworn to do. It is permissible 
 
 19 
 
for arbitrators, in settling disputes, to make such mutual con- 
 cessions between themselves as may be just and proper, but they 
 must not decide upon, and do, such acts against their own in- 
 dividual judgment. 
 
 The authority of arbitrators terminates immediately upon 
 their giving notice to the parties of their inability to make an 
 award under the term of the submission, or upon the death of 
 one of them if it occurs before an award has been made. 
 
 The duties of arbitrators being judicial in their nature, they 
 cannot be held for damages for failure to exercise care or skill 
 in the performance of their functions. 
 
 Regarding the powers of arbitrators, they occupy for 
 the time being a position similar to that of the Judges of the 
 Superior Court. They should endeavor, as far as possible or 
 desirable, to arrive at correct conclusions by the same rules as 
 would have governed the court for which they have been tem- 
 porarily substituted. 
 
 CHAPTER FIVE 
 Submitting Matters in Dispute to Arbitration the Submission 
 
 The first step is for the disputing parties to enter into an 
 agreement whereby they consent to the provisions therein, and 
 not only to arbitrate their differences, but agree to stand to and 
 abide by the award, or, in other words, to obey and perform 
 all orders, decisions and judgments of the arbitrators as cov- 
 ered by the award. This agreement is technically known as 
 the "Submission" (see Form C), and the subsequent award 
 depends largely upon its terms and conditions. It should be 
 a perfectly clear statement and instruction to the arbitrators as 
 to the true intentions of the parties and of the duties he has 
 to perform. It must clearly set forth the exact subject matter of 
 the reference, so that the award may be made perfectly clear 
 and in accordance therewith, so that the arbitrator may not 
 
 20 
 
exceed the proper limits of his authority. The exact form or 
 wording of a submission is in one sense immaterial, provided 
 that it is, according to statute, made perfectly clear that the 
 parties did intend to arbitrate, and that they stated just what 
 was to be arbitrated between them, and that the arbitrator's 
 decision should be the award. The law implies that the parties 
 agree to abide by the award whether this is specifically men- 
 tioned or not. 
 
 As the submission is an important instrument, however, its 
 preparation requires care, and this is sometimes attended to by 
 the attorneys of the parties, particularly if the controversies 
 are of an unusually complicated nature. For an ordinary arbi- 
 tration, however, the submission is quite often drawn up by a 
 notary, or by the prospective arbitrators (in the same way as 
 they may later on prepare an award), provided it be done in 
 accordance with the Code, and reference should be made in the 
 submission to the statute under which** the arbitration is con- 
 ducted. But if this document is prepared by an attorney, I 
 have found it no disadvantage for the arbitrators to be acquainted 
 with the fundamental principles involved, and it is these only 
 which we have under consideration. The author's experience 
 has been that attorneys are always willing to consider carefully 
 any suggestions made by those who have had practical experi- 
 ence with arbitrations. The essential point is not so much in the 
 technical knowledge necessary to prepare arbitration documents 
 as it is to so present the facts to the disputing parties and 
 others, so that they shall prefer arbitration in place of resist- 
 ing technical claims by suits at law. Indeed, it does not seem 
 that one's professional ethics or business methods would be 
 seriously violated if, at every suitable opportunity, architects, 
 contractors, and engineers were to give prominence to the ad- 
 vantages of arbitration over actions-at-law in all matters of 
 technical dispute. 
 
 If, proceeding under the provisions of the Code (and the 
 author suggests this is the only satisfactory way to proceed), 
 the submission, which is equivalent to pleadings in court trials, 
 must be in writing if it is to be entered as an order of the Supe- 
 rior Court. This is done by filing the executed document with 
 
 21 
 
the Clerk of the county in which one of the parties resides, and 
 paying the filing fee. A note of the filing of the submission 
 must thereupon be entered by the County Clerk in the Register 
 of Actions, as held in the case of Kettleman vs. Treadway, 65 
 Cal., 505. The mere authority to file, without the act, is in- 
 sufficient, but by inspecting the Register of Actions an arbi- 
 trator may always satisfy himself that this has been done. The 
 entry should contain the necessary particulars for example, the 
 names of the arbitrators, and the time limited by the submis- 
 sion, if any, within which the award must be made. After such 
 entry has been made a submission cannot be revoked without 
 the consent of both parties, or by leave or order of the court. 
 But in the case of the California Academy of Sciences vs. 
 Fletcher, 99 Cal., 207, it would appear that the word "there- 
 upon" does not necessarily mean immediately, for in this case 
 such entry was not completely made until nineteen days after 
 the award was made and filed, but it was held that jurisdiction 
 did exist to enter judgment upon the award, which was done. 
 We see, therefore, that the submission may be filed at any time 
 before judgment is entered upon the award. 
 
 Valid verbal submissions may be made. They possess dis- 
 advantages, however, like other verbal agreements; moreover, 
 they cannot be made an order of the court, and the award, when 
 made, is under a similar disadvantage. 
 
 In a general way, any person legally capable of making a 
 contract may submit controversies to arbitration, but it should 
 be remembered that a single partner cannot bind his co-part- 
 ners to arbitration unless they have wholly abandoned the busi- 
 ness to him or are incapable of acting. (Sec. 2430, C. C. P.) 
 The case of Jones vs. Bailey, 5 Cal. 345, has a good decision 
 on this point. 
 
 Corporations or firms must execute a submission in the 
 same formal manner as they would any deed or similar instru- 
 ment under the corporate seal, and by the signatures of the 
 duly authorized officers of the company. 
 
 Amendments, if necessary, to submissions must be made 
 prior to the first hearing. Grounds for revocation of a submis- 
 
 22 
 
sion are, the death of one of the parties, undoubted bias or 
 misconduct on the part of an arbitrator, or his refusal to proceed. 
 
 Should it be desired to revoke a submission, then such in- 
 tention by the parties should be embodied in an instrument 
 executed in the same manner as the original submission. There 
 are, however, decisions supporting the doctrine that, a submis- 
 sion once made a rule of the court, is irrevocable without leave 
 of the Court. (Cal. Academy of Sciences vs. Fletcher, 99 Cal., 
 207; 33 Pac., 857.) An agreement between the parties in the 
 submission, not to revoke, does not finally destroy revocability. 
 If the submission be not made an order of the court, it may be 
 revoked at any time before the award is made. The disad- 
 vantage of that method is obvious. 
 
 The submission should set a date upon which the award is 
 to be made and published, and such date is, of course, subject 
 to any reasonable extension of time actually necessary. If 
 no time is set, then sixty days might not be considered an 
 unreasonable time, depending largely, however, upon conditions 
 in each particular case. It is better to fix a date in place of 
 saying so many months hereafter. (There is a doubt whether 
 lunar or calendar months are intended.) 
 
 It is advisable that the submission, and acceptance by arbi- 
 trators and umpire, be executed in duplicate, one of each to be 
 filed, as already stated, and the duplicate copy to be retained by 
 the arbitrators for their guidance. 
 
 Every care should be taken to state exactly what it is that 
 is to be arbitrated. The author has found it a good plan to 
 have detailed schedules of each specific item or claim which 
 each party makes against the other, and vice versa, set forth 
 in the submission, so as to leave no possible room for argu- 
 ment later on during the conduct of the arbitration proceed- 
 ings. This prevents the importation of foreign or other matters 
 by the parties during the hearing, a practice which, if per- 
 mitted, disorganizes the procedure, and causes, therefore, discus- 
 sion and loss of time, also, consequently, expense to the dis- 
 putants. Apart from this, an arbitrator cannot arbitrate upon 
 
 23 
 
any matter in difference that is not contained in the submission ; 
 therefore every claim, pro and con, should be set forth in the 
 submission. 
 
 When a building contract provides that payment for extra 
 work be submitted to arbitration, the contractor should make 
 formal demand for arbitration before commencing suit. (Scam- 
 mon vs. Denio, 72 Cal., 393 ; 14 Pac., 98.) 
 
 It must be remembered by the layman that a submission 
 to arbitration cannot, nor does it, oust the jurisdiction of the 
 court, nor is it intended that it should ; and a submission will 
 very properly be void if its provisions are drawn with that 
 object in view. An interesting case on this is Loup vs. Cal. 
 South. R. Co., 63 Cal., 97. 
 
 It might be well to add a few words regarding Insurance 
 Arbitration. An independent agreement under a policy of in- 
 surance submitting the amount of loss to appraisement, is con- 
 sidered as a common-law arbitration. (Georgia Home Insur- 
 ance Co. vs. Kline, 114 Ala., 366; 21 So., 958.) 
 
 It may be of interest to note also that in reciting Supreme 
 Court decisions, "May on Insurance," page 1176, says: "Any 
 stipulation, therefore, which merely looks to the requirement of 
 certain acts to be done or omitted before bringing an action, 
 seems to be valid, since such a stipulation not only does not 
 oust the courts, but obviously contemplates and makes prepara- 
 tion for an appeal to the courts. It is manifest that the arbitra- 
 tion thus provided for is intended to afford a simple and speedy 
 remedy for the settlement of disputes in regard to losses, and 
 to simplify proceedings in case of a resort to the courts, and 
 is not necessarily to be governed in all respects by the rules 
 which apply to a trial in court. An award so arrived at is not 
 to be lightly set aside, even though there may have been in- 
 formalities or irregularities in the conduct of the proceedings, 
 if it appears, or the Court may have found, that the arbitrators 
 making the award acted in all matters pertaining to the sub- 
 mission in good faith, and with an honest desire to come to a 
 correct result. In such a case the award, it seems to us, should 
 stand." 
 
 24 
 
From still another interesting decision (George A. Case vs. 
 Manufacturers Insurance Co., 82 Cal., 263) it appears that 
 where an arbitration clause in an insurance policy does not fix 
 the number of arbitrators, nor state how they are to be selected, 
 then there can be no right to arbitration. 
 
 It would seem, however, in speaking of insurance matters, 
 that a "valuation" is not arbitration, in the correct sense of the 
 term, but rather an appraisement which prevents differences, 
 and does not really settle any which may have arisen. 
 
 CHAPTER SIX 
 Mode of Procedure 
 
 Having qualified, the two arbitrators will arrange an early 
 meeting between themselves to discuss the mode of procedure, 
 to carefully ascertain their powers and duties under the terms 
 of the Submission. At this meeting may be presented a list 
 of witnesses which the parties may at that time desire to call. 
 The arbitrators should go carefully through each claim made 
 by the respective parties, for the purpose of clearly informing 
 themselves as to the matters in dispute. It is also incumbent 
 upon the arbitrators to carry out their duties with all possible 
 diligence. 
 
 Should it be apparent, as is frequently the case, that a 
 disagreement is pending, and if it does actually occur between 
 the two arbitrators, the umpire should be immediately notified 
 that his services will be required, and he must qualify in the 
 same manner as the two arbitrators have previously done. 
 
 The author considers that it is better to nominate an umpire 
 at the same time or before the original arbitrators qualify, even 
 though his services are never required. Cases have been known 
 where, after disagreement has occurred, arbitrators could not 
 agree upon an umpire. 
 
 Where two arbitrators can agree, and adjust all matters 
 in dispute without the umpire being called in, matters are, of 
 
 25 
 
course, simplified. When the arbitrators are ready to proceed 
 they should serve a notice of hearing upon the parties (see 
 Form F), and subpoena witnesses designated by both parties. 
 Where the selection of an umpire is conditional upon disagree- 
 ment of arbitrators, the disagreement need not be a serious one, 
 but they should not "agree to disagree," as is sometimes done; 
 they must act in good faith in all things. It will be a sufficient 
 disagreement if one arbitrator requires more evidence than the 
 other. Notwithstanding such disagreement, the two original 
 arbitrators must continue to act, hear testimony, and otherwise 
 perform their duties, a majority of. the three, if not all three, 
 joining in the award. If all three can afterwards agree and 
 sign the award, although not absolutely necessary, it forms a 
 fitting conclusion to an arbitration. 
 
 Arbitrators as such are (although they may even be attor- 
 neys by training) not expected, nor are they compelled, to 
 follow court methods or even be familiar with them. They 
 may determine their own course of procedure. They have to 
 decide solely upon the facts, after hearing all the testimony, 
 and bringing their own technical knowledge to their aid in 
 arriving at a decision. They should take notes of the proceed- 
 ings, even though the case may be one of short duration or of 
 minor importance. In more important cases it is prudent to 
 arrange for stenographic reports to be taken and duly verified. 
 
 Arbitrators must, of course, hear all the evidence on both 
 sides. Lord Eldon, the eminent jurist, once said: "By the 
 great principles of eternal justice, which is before all acts, 
 regulations, and proceedings of court, it is impossible that an 
 award can stand where arbitrators hear one side and decline 
 to hear the other." 
 
 The case of Curtiss vs. City of Sacramento, 62 Cal., 102, 
 presents an interesting decision on this point. It is an applica- 
 tion to set aside an award on the ground that no opportunity 
 was given the parties to submit evidence. Briefly, the point 
 arose in this way: Two arbitrators met without the third one 
 and took testimony; the third arbitrator then arrived at his 
 decision by reading over the notes of the evidence without being 
 
 26 
 
present when it was given. The court held that the award 
 was invalid and void. 
 
 Unless there is proof to the contrary, the court will presume 
 in favor of the integrity of the arbitrators and the regularity of 
 their acts. Neither party should be allowed to speculate upon 
 the probability of his getting a favorable award, and therefore 
 if any objections are to be taken in the course of procedure or 
 otherwise, they should be made at the time the cause for such 
 objections first occurs; if not, a waiver regarding them may be 
 reasonably assumed by the arbitrators. If one of the parties 
 should substitute a foreman or other representative in place of 
 himself at a hearing, it would operate as a waiver of objections 
 on his part to the acts of the arbitrators, as illustrated in the case 
 of Foster vs. Carr, 135 Cal., 83; 67 Pac., 43. 
 
 Should either side wish to be represented by counsel before 
 the Board of Arbitration, the arbitrators should be notified in 
 good time, as well as the parties of the other side ; and although 
 arbitrators are not bound to hear counsel, it scarcely seems 
 fair, to the author, that there should be a refusal to do so within 
 proper limits, subject to the discretion of the arbitrators. In 
 such cases stenographic reports of proceedings should always 
 be taken, and preserved until all questions of dispute between 
 
 the parties are finally disposed of. 
 
 * / 
 
 In regard to evidence, all witnesses must be sworn, or 
 make affirmation if their religious or similar belief is urged as 
 an excuse for not taking the usual oath. A convenient proceed- 
 ing in opening an arbitration is as follows : The party to begin, 
 the one who demanded arbitration (equivalent to plaintiff in a 
 court action), makes a short statement of his case, which may be 
 read or given viva voce. He may then proceed to call his wit- 
 nesses to support his statement. The other party may then 
 make a similar statement, and produce his witnesses, and he 
 may reply upon the entire claims. The party commencing is 
 then at liberty to make general reply. All witnesses may of 
 course be cross-examined by the arbitrators, and with their 
 permission either party may ask questions of the other party 
 or his witnesses, in so far as it may in the arbitrators' opinion 
 
 27 
 
be necessary to bring out the truth or material facts. An arbi- 
 trator is bound by the same rules as a judge. Affidavits should 
 not be received in lieu of viva voce testimony. If documentary 
 evidence is submitted, insist upon seeing originals. Entries in 
 time sheets or material books kept for the benefit of one party 
 are regarded as insufficient evidence, but they may be used 
 against him by the other party if the latter so desires. Such 
 evidence has about the same value as hearsay evidence, and 
 should be accepted with reserve, for nothing can prevent persons 
 from making entries to suit themselves, and submitting same 
 to confirm their subsequent statements. Bookkeepers or others 
 who wrote the entries in books should be called to prove them. 
 A witness, however, should be permitted to refer to any original 
 notes made by himself, or to authenticated copies, for the pur- 
 pose of confirming or reinforcing his memory. Drawings, specifi- 
 cations, correspondence, documents, etc., should always be 
 identified by testimony, and conveniently lettered for future 
 identification as Exhibit "A," "B," "C" and so on before being 
 admitted as evidence. 
 
 It is clearly the duty of both parties to use every care and 
 diligence in obtaining and presenting evidence in support of 
 their claims, and in disproving incorrect claims of the other 
 parties. Such testimony should be brought in at a proper stage 
 of the proceedings. (Montifiore vs. Engels, 3 Cal., 431.) If 
 one of the parties rests, or omits to submit any testimony for 
 an unreasonable length of time, then the arbitrators may be 
 justified in not again hearing such party. 
 
 The rules of evidence apply in Arbitrations the same as 
 before a court. False testimony, under oath, is always abhor- 
 rent and punishable by the statute. 
 
 If it should appear to arbitrators, by reason of any new 
 development or otherwise, that a fairer decision may be arrived 
 at, they have ample power to re-open and re-consider any 
 matter, and they have the right to refuse to do so when once 
 their decision has been made. 
 
 Either party is entitled to apply to have an arbitration 
 stopped if it can be shown that arbitrators are receiving testi- 
 
 28 
 
mony at a time at which said party had not been notified that 
 testimony would be taken. Parties may also, if they desire, 
 abandon or repudiate a valid award by mutual consent by means 
 of a subsequent agreement to re-submit their differences to the 
 arbitration of the same or different arbitrators. 
 
 Now we will consider the position of umpire. Provision 
 is made in many building contracts that if the two arbitrators 
 cannot agree they shall select a third, or umpire, to act with 
 them. It has been held in Dudley vs. Thomas, 23 Cal., 365, 
 that arbitrators duly qualified may appoint the umpire at any 
 time after such qualification and prior to the making of an 
 award, and it would therefore appear that it is quite unnecessary 
 to defer the appointment of the umpire until disagreement be- 
 tween arbitrators has occurred, although this very provision 
 may be so stipulated in the contract agreement. At any rate, 
 in practice it is found to be a bad and very inconvenient con- 
 dition in building arbitrations, and it would seem to be better, 
 and quite proper, for the umpire to be selected immediately 
 after the arbitrators and before the investigation is commenced. 
 A convenient arrangement is for the umpire to sit with the 
 arbitrators and act as chairman of the board. By so doing 
 he has the advantage of not only hearing, but of directing the 
 presentation of, testimony from the commencement of the pro- 
 ceedings ; and he is thus prepared, if disputes do occur, to render 
 his decisions without putting witnesses on the stand twice 
 over, which would be necessary if the two original arbitrators 
 were unable to agree, and which is so frequently the case in 
 building disputes. The umpire should, however, refrain from 
 voluntarily joining in any discussion between the arbitrators 
 in their efforts to agree, his duty being to decide when appealed 
 to by them for the reason that they cannot agree; in short, 
 his authority to act does not come until the arbitrators cannot 
 agree. He must himself hear all the testimony in relation to 
 any matters passed up to him for a decision. As has been 
 shown, it is not sufficient to use the notes of testimony made 
 by others, and it should be remembered that the umpire does 
 not decide as between the arbitrators, but solely between the 
 parties to the submission. 
 
 In the case of a building arbitration to determine differ- 
 
 29 
 
ences between partners, it would be inadvisable for laymen 
 arbitrators to proceed without first taking counsel's advice as 
 to partnership rights of the parties. 
 
 When the testimony is all in, each party should be notified 
 that the hearing is about to be closed, and the question should 
 be asked whether they have any further evidence to present, and 
 that the arbitrators will proceed to consider their award; but, 
 having duly notified the parties from time to time as to the 
 place and hour of hearing, and adjournments thereof, and all 
 the evidence being in and heard by each of the arbitrators, it 
 is not obligatory that they should notify the parties of the place 
 or hour at which they will convene finally to consider and de- 
 termine the issues that may remain undecided; for, like court 
 jurors, they may consider and make their award in private, 
 and it may be stated that the courts make no distinctions be- 
 tween the awards of lay and legal arbitrators. 
 
 Finally, it should be remembered that it is most undesirable, 
 and certainly not conducive to the final adjustment, for arbi- 
 trators to proceed in any other than a strictly formal disinter- 
 ested manner, and accepting no favors from either party or 
 their witnesses. Nothing they may do will hold good unless 
 all have acted together. One must not absent himself from a 
 hearing and then accept what another may say occurred. All 
 must act together. 
 
 CHAPTER SEVEN 
 The Award 
 
 In submissions, one may frequently find a clause to the 
 effect that the parties agree not to appeal from the award; but, 
 as has already been stated, an arbitration cannot oust the juris- 
 diction of the court, and such a clause could in no sense prevent 
 it from exercising that jurisdiction if occasion demands. 
 
 My knowledge of the statutes is insufficient to warrant my 
 saying that a Legislature intended an arbitrator's award to be 
 
 30 
 
absolutely final and beyond appeal except for fraud or mis- 
 conduct, but it would appear that such was the original inten- 
 tion, and an amendment making it so might prove to be a wise 
 provision for disputants. 
 
 An award must conform to the requirements of the sub- 
 mission and be made in good faith, based upon justice; and, 
 provided always that the arbitrators' acts have at all times been 
 lawful, an award will stand and may be enforced by the court 
 in the same manner as a judgment. If the award, which should 
 be in writing, is an equitable decision, founded upon reason, 
 and even though the actual law in the premises is entirely dis- 
 regarded, the award would not in consequence be rendered 
 invalid or void. The statutory requirements, however, must 
 be observed if judgment is to be entered upon the award, or 
 the latter may be successfully attacked. 
 
 The award, of course, must not be prepared until all the 
 testimony is in and the enquiry is closed. It should state that 
 all the evidence has been heard ancl that all the disputed matters 
 have been determined and closed, otherwise the award is liable 
 to be held defective and set aside. When the submission has 
 been made an order of the court, then the award, which must 
 in such cases be in writing, may be filed with the clerk of the 
 county, who will make a note of it in his register, and upon the 
 expiration of the required time (usually five days) thereafter, 
 and upon application by one of the parties, who will make 
 affidavit that a notice of the filing of the award has been served 
 upon the other party four days prior to such application being 
 made, and that no order staying entry of judgment was out- 
 standing, then -the award shall be entered by the clerk as a 
 judgment, having the full force and effect of a court judgment. 
 (Sec. 1286 Cal., C. C. P.) There can be no appeal from a judg- 
 ment entered before a motion is made. The court, upon motion 
 by one of the parties, may modify or correct an award under 
 certain circumstances for example, in the case of obviously 
 incorrect calculation of figures, or a faulty description of a 
 person, or of real estate, or where an award included matters 
 which are not a part of the matters submitted to arbitration, 
 and so forth (See Sec. 1288, Cal. C. C. P.), but the greatest care 
 
 31 
 
is necessary in writing out the award, for it cannot be legally 
 altered by the arbitrators, even to correct errors. A verbal 
 award, in other respects good, would not be invalid, but among 
 its disadvantages judgment cannot follow its publication, nor 
 indeed can this be the case upon written awards unless the sub- 
 mission in such particular matter has been previously entered 
 as an order of the court. 
 
 It is usual to recite from the submission the authority for 
 the investigation and other points essential to clearness. The 
 exact terms of the submission must be closely followed and its 
 specific language complied with. The award must deal only 
 with the specific matters of controversy, nothing more nor less. 
 The award should preferably be written by the arbitrators, or 
 one of them, and not by any other person for example, by the 
 attorney of either of the parties. If some special form or arrange- 
 ment of the award is necessary by reason of some unusual 
 complications or controversies, then, even in such a case, the" 
 actual award must be the arbitrators' own decision, and not that 
 of any other person; and it would be well that an outside 
 attorney, entirely disinterested, should be asked to advise as to 
 any particular form that may be desired or necessary. 
 
 Where the submission stipulates for the ascertainment of 
 a definite amount to be payable by one or both parties to the 
 other, the award must definitely fix the amount or amounts so 
 to be paid by one or both parties to the other, and it should be 
 stated how and when such amounts are to be paid; but if the 
 award leaves such matters unsettled, or fails to give data from 
 which such amounts may be readily computed, then such award 
 is bad. It is sufficiently definite, however, if it requires only a 
 simple mathematical operation to fix such amount or amounts. 
 
 An honest mistake of judgment on the part of arbitrators 
 which does not go beyond the limits of the submission is not, 
 as a rule, regarded as cause for impeachment, notwithstanding 
 that the court might have decided otherwise. The court will 
 not substitute its judgment for that of the arbitrators, provided 
 always that the latter was made all in good faith. The award 
 must be definite, final, unmistakable and conclusive in its 
 
 32 
 
language and parts. The expression occasionally used, "we 
 propose" that such a thing be done, is too ambiguous and should 
 not be used. We "direct" is proper and much to be preferred. 
 
 Every right and obligation of each party must be clearly 
 fixed and made definite. The award should be made within the 
 time stipulated in the submission, or within such period of ex- 
 tended time as may have received the sanction of the court and 
 the parties, or if there be no time stipulation, then sixty days 
 would not be considered an unreasonable limit. An agreement 
 between the parties authorizing an extension of time for delivery 
 of the award should be by deed corresponding with the original 
 submission. 
 
 Arbitrators are not required to give details of their figures, 
 nor reasons nor explanations as to how or why they arrived at 
 their conclusions, any more than judges of the court are required 
 to do such things. (See Arbitration between Connor and Pratt, 
 128 Cal., 279; 60 Pac., 862.) Even comments and discussions 
 concerning an award with the parties or other persons are best 
 avoided, and during the course of an arbitration it is far better 
 that no conversation on the subject shall be held with any person, 
 unless it be with a co-arbitrator. An arbitrator should on no 
 account publicly anticipate an award, or express hostile or 
 favorable opinions concerning the parties or their methods. 
 Such conversations, if they become known, may later on be 
 construed to amount to bias or prejudice, and afford ample 
 grounds for vacating an award (Tyson vs. Wells, 2 Cal., 122), 
 even though the co-arbitrator had preserved a proper disinter- 
 ested attitude. It seems almost needless to add that no arbitrator 
 should be a party to the purchase or the acceptance of a lien 
 upon the undetermined interest of either party in an arbitration, 
 whether contingent upon the award or otherwise. 
 
 The award must not only state the amount of money due 
 from one party to the other, but it should direct its payment 
 and when it is to be paid, otherwise a non-payment would not 
 constitute disobedience of the award. 
 
 A judgment entered upon an award may be appealed (Fair- 
 child vs. Boten, 42 Cal., 125), notwithstanding any counter 
 
 33 
 
stipulation in the submission. A writ of execution will follow 
 judgment upon an award the same as upon any other court 
 judgment. 
 
 An award may be set aside if serious irregularities on the 
 part of arbitrators or umpire can be shown for example, cor- 
 ruption, fraud, gross error or material misconduct, irregularity, 
 refusing to postpone a hearing, or if the arbitrators have acted 
 in any way in which the rights of the parties have suffered or 
 been prejudiced, or if any award has been improperly procured. 
 But, as already implied, an award cannot be impeached solely 
 as being contrary to law and evidence (Carsley vs. Lindsay, 14 
 Cal., 394), and this is a good point to remember. 
 
 The author recalls a case in which one of three arbitrators 
 declined to sign an award, upon the ground that it was contrary 
 to the evidence, and this arbitrator filed a minority report to 
 that effect, but it would appear that such a proceeding could 
 have been of little or no value in any attempt to impeach the 
 award. As such report has no effect, it is quite unnecessary 
 and might well be omitted entirely. Wherever possible it is 
 better for all the arbitrators to sign the award in the interests 
 of finality. 
 
 Wherever the statute requires arbitrators to acknowledge 
 the execution of awards, this must be done to entitle either party 
 to a judgment upon an award, and in any case it is desirable 
 that the award should be signed by the arbitrators at the same 
 time and place i. e., in the presence of each other. It is obvious, 
 of course, that one award only can be made. 
 
 Courts usually construe an award with a desire to sustain 
 the judgment of the arbitrators whom the parties have them- 
 selves selected to be their judges, and in favor of finality and 
 validity; but an offensive award, or one in direct opposition to 
 the rights of the parties, cannot stand. 
 
 An award may be set aside where one party was induced 
 to agree to arbitration through misrepresentations made by 
 the other party, or if in submitting testimony material facts 
 have been suppressed which might have affected the decision. 
 It has also been held that false testimony will, in certain cases, 
 
 34 
 
justify the setting aside of an award, or of the latter be uncertain 
 or incomplete. The award must be decisive and all matters 
 disposed of. (Jacob vs. Ketcham, 37 Cal., 197; Porter vs. Scott, 
 7 Cal., 312; White vs. Arthur, 59 Cal., 33.) 
 
 The case of Peachy vs. Ritchie, 4 Cal., 205, is interesting 
 as showing grounds for impeachment. (See also Code of Civil 
 Procedure in the several states.) 
 
 The reason for the foregoing seeming strictness exhibited 
 by the courts in reference to arbitrations is because arbitration 
 is a purely statutory proceeding, and there can be no doubt 
 whatever that the statute must be closely followed. It has 
 been decided, however, in Kreiss vs. Hotaling, 96 Cal., 617; 
 31 Pac., 740) that a substantial compliance with the statute is 
 sufficient. 
 
 It is not advisable to date or publish an award upon a legal 
 holiday, or upon a Sunday. 
 
 CHAPTER EIGHT 
 Compensation of Arbitrators and Umpire 
 
 There is a doubt at common law assuming there is no 
 definite promise to pay whether an arbitrator can legally re- 
 cover his compensation by an action at law. Lord Kenyon, the 
 eminent jurist, ruled in 1801 that the office of arbitrator was 
 purely an honorary one, and the author believes that decision 
 is still maintained. Now, however, business conditions have 
 entirely changed, and common sense would indicate that there 
 is an implied promise to pay the costs of arbitration by the 
 parties to a submission, the more so in recent years, when, 
 among architects, contractors, and engineers, are found com- 
 petent persons who regularly undertake arbitration matters 
 and the adjustment of building disputes as a part of their regular 
 profession or occupation. It would be absurd to say that when 
 such persons are invited to adjust disputes between contending 
 
 35 
 
parties it is expected they will act in an honorary capacity. 
 
 The compensation of an arbitrator or umpire depends some- 
 what upon the circumstances attending each separate case, the 
 importance and nature of the matters in dispute, location, and 
 to some extent the time employed, and the amount of money 
 involved in the dispute. All such things should be considered. 
 A fee per diem is usually arranged. Parties to arbitrations 
 should understand that the time an arbitrator is engaged in 
 hearing testimony is not only the time that should be paid for, 
 for the reason that a % careful arbitrator, like a careful judge, 
 scarcely ever ceases to weigh and consider the matters submitted 
 to him until the award is actually made. This constant responsi- 
 bility must accordingly establish the basis of his compensation, 
 and so it is customary to charge one day for each sitting. Nor 
 does it follow that an arbitrator's or umpire's compensation is 
 alike in all cases; it is more businesslike for each to fix his own 
 individual compensation, which they have the right to do, except 
 where it is fixed by statute. It may, however, be left to the 
 discretion of the court. In building arbitrations the fees can 
 usually be determined beforehand, and this is the better plan. 
 The compensation must on no account be contingent upon the 
 result of the arbitration. It seems superfluous to say this, but 
 the author has met with such cases. 
 
 In the absence of a definite agreement as to who shall pay 
 the costs and expenses of an arbitration, both parties might be 
 held liable for the full amount. (Young vs. Starkey, 1 Cal., 426.) 
 An arbitrator's claim for compensation if there be a promise 
 to pay, implied or otherwise, may be enforced in the courts 
 of law the same as any other legal or just claim. 
 
 The award should clearly direct how, when, and by whom the 
 costs, etc., should be paid. It is more satisfactory that these 
 should be paid in the first place by the party who takes up the 
 award, and the expense adjusted afterward between the parties 
 as the award may direct. If the compensation has not been fixed 
 beforehand, then a reasonable compensation is naturally implied, 
 but in such a case arbitrators might find it difficult to collect 
 by legal process, if the claim was contested. Where such agree- 
 
 36 
 
ment or promise does exist, then the arbitrators have a lien 
 upon the submission and award until their charges are paid, 
 and it is advisable that the contents of the award should not be 
 made known until this has been done. 
 
 Note. In the preparation of the foregoing pages the author 
 is indebted for references to the following standard works : Code 
 of Civil Procedure, Cyclopedia of Law and Procedure, Red- 
 mond's Law of Arbitration and Awards; Bancroft-Whitney's 
 Cal. Digest, Journal of the Western Society of Engineers, Par- 
 sons' Law of Business, 
 
 (See also "Arbitration Its Place in Our Professional 
 Practice," a paper read by the author before the Technical 
 Society of the Pacific Coast November 2, 1900, and printed in 
 the Journal of the Association of Engineering Societies; also see The 
 American Architect, April 13, 1901. 
 
 37 
 
CHAPTER NINE 
 Convenient Forms 
 
 FORM A (Wright). Demanding 
 
 Arbitration. 
 
 BUILDING ARBITRATION NOTICE. 
 To .. 191 
 
 A disagreement having arisen in connection with the performance and 
 completion of a certain Building Contract made and entered into between 
 
 you and myself, dated 191 , I hereby give 
 
 you notice that under the provisions of said contract I hereby demand an 
 Arbitration for the purpose of finally adjusting and settling all matters in 
 difference between us, as provided for in said contract. 
 
 I hereby nominate Mr 
 
 as one Arbitrator, and request you to nominate another Arbitrator on or 
 
 before day of 191 , and notify me 
 
 thereof. 
 
 Address 
 
 FORM B (Wright). Accepting 
 
 Arbitration. 
 
 BUILDING ARBITRATION REPLY TO NOTICE. 
 To .. 191 
 
 In accordance with your notice to me dated 191 , 
 
 demanding Arbitration, I hereby comply therewith and nominate Mr. 
 
 as an Arbitrator, and have requested 
 
 him to communicate with Mr 
 
 whom you have nominated as an Arbitrator. 
 
 Address 
 
 38 
 
FORM C (Wright). Submission. 
 
 BUILDING ARBITRATION SUBMISSION. 
 
 THIS INDENTURE, made by and between 
 
 of the City of , County of 
 
 State of of the first part, 
 
 hereafter called the Owner, and , 
 
 of the City of , County of , 
 
 State of , of the second part, hereafter called 
 
 the Contractor. 
 
 WHEREAS, the parties hereto have heretofore entered into a certain 
 
 Building Contract, dated 191 , and which 
 
 contract was filed with the Recorder of the City of , 
 
 County of , on the day of 
 
 191 , and 
 
 WHEREAS, said contract did contain the following stipulations, to wit: 
 
 (insert Arbitration Clause in full). 
 
 NOW, WHEREAS, a dispute, and disputes, has and have arisen, and are 
 still undecided and existing, between said parties, as hereafter set forth, 
 to wit: 
 
 Said owner claims against said contractor the amounts set forth in the 
 following Schedule marked "A," as follows, to wit: 
 
 SCHEDULE A. 
 
 (Here state in detail all the owner's claims against said contractor 
 and estimated money value thereof.) 
 
 which is disputed by said contractor. Said 
 
 Contractor claims against said Owner the amounts set forth in the following 
 Schedule, marked "B" : 
 
 SCHEDULE B. 
 
 (Here state in detail all the contractor's claims against said owner 
 and estimated money value thereof.) 
 
 which is disputed by said owner. 
 
 NOW, WITNESSETH: That the parties to said contract and to this Sub- 
 
 39 
 
mission to Arbitration do each of them and for their respective heirs, adminis- 
 trators and assigns, covenant and agree with each other to and do hereby 
 submit all the before mentioned disputes as herein set forth to the award and 
 
 final determination of and 
 
 as Arbitrators, and to such Umpire as these two last named persons may 
 select, in accordance with the before- recited stipulation in said Contract, and 
 further that this Arbitration shall be conducted in all respects according to 
 
 the provisions of Sections of the Code of Civil Procedure 
 
 of the State of and that this Submission 
 
 be entered as an order of the Superior Court in and for the County of 
 , State of ... 
 
 The Arbitrators are hereby directed to state in their Award to what amount 
 in lawful money the said Owner is indebted to said Contractor, if any, and 
 to what amount in lawful money the said Contractor is indebted to said 
 Owner, if any, and how and when such indebtedness, if any, shall be paid 
 by both or either one to the other, in final settlement of all matters in difference 
 under this Arbitration. 
 
 And the parties hereto do hereby further mutually agree as follows, to wit: 
 
 The award shall be made and published not later than the 
 
 day of 191 , subject to such reasonable extension of time 
 
 as may be necessary. The award shall thereupon be entered as a judgment 
 of the Superior Court of 
 
 The costs and expenses of this Arbitration shall be borne and paid by 
 us, the parties hereto, in such proportion as the award shall direct; and if 
 so directed by the award, the party taking up the award shall pay to the 
 Arbitrators the full amount of the costs and expenses thereof before the award 
 is delivered, and the other party shall then within twenty-four hours pay to or 
 refund to the one paying the full amount the proportion of the costs and 
 expenses which the' award directs him to pay. The total amount of said 
 costs and expenses and the amounts due from each party shall be stated in 
 the Award. 
 
 FINALLY: The parties hereto mutually agree to stand to and abide by 
 the award and to forthwith comply with and execute all orders, awards, 
 decisions, and judgments therein contained.* 
 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and 
 seals this day of , 191 
 
 Subscribed and sworn to before me this 
 
 day of , 191. 
 
 (NOTE: In cases where it may be more convenient. Forms D and E may 
 follow Form C and form part of the same document.) 
 
 * Optional, "and they further agree not to appeal from such final award." 
 
 40 
 
FORM D (Wright). Arbitrators' 
 
 Acceptance, 
 
 BUILDING ARBITRATION. 
 
 We, the undersigned. and 
 
 , having been nominated to 
 
 act as Arbitrators for the purpose of finally adjusting and settling all disputes 
 
 and matters in difference existing between 
 
 and arising out of the performance and com- 
 pletion of a certain Building Contract made and entered into between the 
 
 parties last named, dated the day of 
 
 191 , do hereby, each for himself, accept such nomination, and we each will 
 
 faithfully, fully and fairly hear the allegations of the parties and the testimony 
 presented to us, and we will each for himself make a just and true award 
 according to our best understanding, and we hereby select and appoint 
 
 , as Umpire, in accordance with 
 
 the provisions of the before-mentioned Building Contract. 
 
 Arbitrator. 
 
 Arbitrator. 
 
 Subscribed and sworn to before me this 
 
 day of , 191 
 
 FORM E (Wright). Acceptance by 
 
 Umpire. 
 
 BUILDING ARBITRATION. 
 
 Whereas, and 
 
 Arbitrators duly qualified, having selected and appointed me, the undersigned, 
 as Umpire for the purpose of finally adjusting and settling all matters in 
 
 difference existing between and 
 
 arising out of the performance 
 
 and completion of a certain Building Contract, made and entered into between 
 
 the parties last named, dated the day of , 
 
 191 , I do hereby accept such selection and appointment. 
 
 Further, I will faithfully, fully, and fairly hear such allegations of the 
 parties and testimony as may be presented to me, and I will make a just and 
 true award according to my best understanding. 
 
 Umpire, 
 
 Subscribed and sworn to before rne this 
 
 day of , 191 
 
 41 
 
FORM F (Wright). N otice of 
 
 Hearing. 
 
 BUILDING ARBITRATION. 
 
 To / Parties to Submission to Building Arbi- 
 
 and \ tration, dated day of 
 
 \ 1 91 
 
 NOTICE OF HEARING. 
 
 In the matter of the above Arbitration we appoint the., 
 day of , 191........ at the hour of. 
 
 at as the time and place for hearing 
 
 the allegations and testimony therein. 
 
 The time and place at which adjourned meetings will (if necessary) be 
 held will be announced at the above and adjourned meetings. You will please 
 take notice thereof and attend. 
 
 Arbitrator. 
 
 Arbitrator. 
 
 ...day of ., 191 
 
 FORM O (Wright). Subpoena for 
 
 Witnesses. 
 
 BUILDING ARBITRATION. 
 SUBPOENA. 
 
 1 Parties to Submission to Building Arbi- 
 
 and N tration, dated day of 
 
 V ... . 191.... 
 
 To. 
 
 In the matter of the above Arbitration you are hereby notified to attend 
 before the Arbitrators, without fail, for the purpose of giving testimony in 
 
 the said matter at on , 
 
 the day of 191 
 
 Arbitrator. 
 
 Arbitrator. 
 
 day of 191 
 
 42 
 
FORM H (Wright). Oath. 
 
 BUILDING ARBITRATION. 
 
 An Arbitrator will first say to each witness as follows, viz: This is an 
 Arbitration to adjust and settle certain matters in difference existing between 
 
 and as set 
 
 forth in a certain Submission to Arbitration dated 
 
 One of the Arbitrators will administer the oath as follows: 
 
 The testimony you shall give touching all matters concerning this Arbitra- 
 tion shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help 
 you God. 
 
 (The witness will stand, uncovered, with right hand raised, during the 
 administration of the oath.) 
 
 AFFIRMATION: to be similarly used for witnesses having no religious 
 belief, as follows: 
 
 I sincerely, solemnly, and truly affirm and declare that I will answer 
 truly all questions put to me concerning this Arbitration. 
 
 NOTE: Where an interpreter is necessary it is customary to first swear 
 the interpreter. The witness then takes such oath as he states shall be binding 
 upon him, administered by an Arbitrator, through the interpreter. 
 
 43 
 
FORM I (Wright). AwmrA. 
 
 BUILDING ARBITRATION. 
 
 Parties to ( 
 Arbitration \ 
 
 Arbitrators 
 
 AWARD. 
 
 and 
 and whom else it may concern: 
 
 WHEREAS, by a certain Submission to Arbitration dated the... 
 day of , 191 , made between 
 
 and for the purpose 
 
 of submitting all disputes then existing between them, as set forth in Schedules 
 
 "A" and "B," forming part of said Submission to 
 
 and , Arbitrators duly qualified, for 
 
 their final determination and award, and who, in case they could not agree, 
 were empowered to select an Umpire in accordance with the terms of a certain 
 Building Contract entered into by the first named parties herein; and 
 
 44 
 
WHEREAS, the two said Arbitrators have disagreed and have selected 
 as an Arbitrator to act as Umpire; and 
 
 WHEREAS, the decision of any two of the last-named Arbitrators and 
 Umpire shall be binding upon the parties to this Arbitration, as provided for 
 in the before-mentioned Contract; and 
 
 WHEREAS, We, the undersigned, acting together, having heard all of the 
 testimony of each of the said parties and the arguments presented to us, and 
 having examined all witnesses under oath, and the evidence on both sides being 
 now all in, and all disputed matters determined and closed, we hereby make 
 and publish our award herein as follows, to wit: 
 
 AWARD. 
 
 WB DIRECT Owner, to pay 
 
 unto Contractor, the sum of 
 
 _\ Dollars, ($ ). in United 
 
 States lawful money within seven days hereafter. 
 
 WE DIRECT Contractor, 
 
 to pay unto , Owner, the sum of 
 
 Dollars, ($ ), in United 
 
 States lawful money within seven days hereafter. 
 
 We also direct that the above payment, and payments, shall be made and 
 accepted by the parties in final settlement of all disputes and matters in 
 difference between them under this Arbitration. 
 
 And we further direct that the total costs and expenses of this Arbitration, 
 
 amounting to the sum of - ~. Dollars, 
 
 ($ .), shall be paid to the undersigned by the party taking up 
 
 this award, and that owner, 
 
 shall pay the sum of Dollars, 
 
 (I - ^ ), as his proportion of said costs and expenses, and that 
 
 _ Contractor, shall pay the sum of 
 
 Dollars, ($ ), as his proportion 
 
 of said costs and expenses. 
 
 45 
 
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have together and in the presence of each 
 
 other attached our signatures to this our Award, the day of 
 
 191 
 
 Arbitrator. 
 
 .Arbitrator. 
 
 _ Umpire. 
 
 Subscribed and sworn to before me this 
 
 day of 191 
 
NOTE The Author will be pleased to receive any suggestions from readers 
 with a view to making future additions of this work of more value or interest to 
 laymen. Any reports of recent interesting Arbitration cases appertaining to 
 Building Construction will be much appreciated if forwarded. 
 
 571 California Street 
 
 San Francisco, Cai. 
 
 G. ALEXANDER WRIGHT. 
 
 READER'S NOTES 
 
 o . , 
 
 : / *. :..* , ; 
 i . s : : 
 
READER'S NOTES 
 
 48 
 

 THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW 
 
 AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS 
 
 WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN 
 THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY 
 WILL INCREASE TO SO CENTS ON THE FOURTH 
 DAY AND TO $1.OO ON THE SEVENTH DAY 
 OVERDUE. 
 
 13Apr54Vlf 
 
 LD 21-100m-7,'40 (6936s) 
 
Gaylord Bros. 
 
 -Makers 
 
 Syracuse, \ y 
 
 P4T. JM. 21 m 
 
 HT~ J<3*5-& 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY