The scheme has triumphed because the Washington architect-engineer, instead of deriding Edison and dwelling upon the defects of the idea, set out to overcome the problems involved, especially that identified with the moulds. He has succeeded. Instead of demanding an initial expenditure of £5,000--$25,000--upon this preliminary he has reduced the mould expense down to £100--$500. This brings the idea within the reach of commerce. He does not advocate a mould for the complete house, but pursues what may be described as sectional-stage moulding. Plates of steel are pressed into flanged sections 24 inches square. These are clipped and wedged together to form a trough to hold the liquid cement until it hardens. Above this row of plates is disposed a second similar row, forming another trough upon the top of that which has already been filled, and which is setting. When the lower trough contents have hardened the lower array of plates is rolled over to form another trough above the one in which the cement has been run, this overlapping process, as the wall hardens, being continued until the top has been reached. These plates also serve as forms for the moulding of the floors and roof, and are additionally attractive because they readily admit of the introduction of any desired artistic finish. It is a system which lends itself to cheap and rapid construction, as events have amply proved. That the “poured” germ-proof house, built in one solid block, possesses distinct advantages over the building carried out along orthodox lines is evident from the alacrity with which such homes are purchased or occupied, a tendency which is just as pronounced in this country as in the United States. This tends to demonstrate that while the man-in-the-street knows nothing concerning the pros and cons of building materials, he certainly does appreciate the overwhelming advantages of concrete, which, be it noted, is the logical antidote to jerry-building. That the poured, one-piece house is not merely attractive because of its relative cheapness is evidenced by the number of stately homes which have been built in accordance with this principle upon the other side of the Atlantic. Seeing that these homes have been built to the order of, and are occupied by, those to whom cost is a trifling consideration, it would certainly seem as if the so-called defects of the poured house were more imaginary than real. I have seen magnificent homes, ranging in cost from £5,000 to £25,000--$25,000 to $125,000--built from foundation to roof upon the Edisonian idea. They certainly would have been promptly demolished and rebuilt in other material if the monolithic house possessed even the slightest sign of any one of the many ills to which it is academically said to be exposed.