710 PROCEEDINGS OF SECTION I 
all students of art. Nor do I pretend to lay down dogmatic 
rules; my object is merely to indicate the principles on which 
my remarks are based. ‘ Beauty,” says Lessing, ‘of which we 
derive our first notions from material objects, has universal laws, 
which apply to many things—to actions and thoughts, as well as 
to forms.” And I venture to assert that by applying the rules 
here suggested we may all know whether our dwellings and 
furniture, our gardens, our costumes, and even our manners and 
speech, are in good taste, otherwise artistic, otherwise—for it is 
the same thing—rightly pleasing. 
Let us first give some attention to architecture, for two 
reasons—because it is the oldest, the most important, and the 
most universal of the fine arts, and because all other arts of 
design are ancillary to it. In the introduction to his great work, 
Mr. Fergusson points out that “two wholly different systems of 
architecture have prevailed at different periods of the world’s 
history. The first is that which prevailed everywhere down to 
the time of the Reformation in the 16th century, and still pre- 
vails in remote corners of the globe wherever European civilisa- 
tion and its influences have not yet penetrated. The other is 
that which was introduced with the revival of classic literature, 
and still prevades all Europe, and wherever European influence 
has established itself. In the first period the art consisted in 
designing a building so as to be most suitable and convenient for 
the purpose it was wanted for, in arranging the parts so as to 
produce the most stately and ornamental effect consistent with 
its uses, and applying to it such ornament as should express and 
harmonise with the construction, and be appropriate to the 
purposes of the building. No race, however rude or remote, has 
failed, when working on this system, to produce buildings which 
are admired by all who behold them, and are well worthy of the 
most attentive consideration. The result of the other system is 
widely different. From St. Peter’s at Rome to our own 
Parliament Houses, not one building has been produced that is 
admitted to have been entirely satisfactory, or which retains a 
hold on general admiration.” And the reason of this, according 
to Mr. Fergusson, lies in the fact “that no sham was ever 
permanently successful, and that the attempt to reproduce any 
style which belongs to a state of society totally different from 
anything that now exists can never be a real or an earnest form 
of art.” 
The classic temple was built with one definite object, namely, 
to contain the image of a god. We know not precisely how 
these temples were lighted ; but certainly they had no windows. 
In modern application, therefore, the whole thing is falsified and 
the design debased. Gothic architecture belongs properly to 
Catholicism ; the high altar was the leading motive in the 
construction. Protestantism, which threw down the altar, 
