PRESIDENTIAL ADDEESS — SECTION J. 429 



submit to such restrictions of our liberty as the Parisians 

 suffered under Napoleon III. and his Prefect Baron Haus- 

 mann, and which, indeed, remain in force till the present 

 time. For, as a rule, city properties, owing to their great value, 

 are held in small blocks, and every ow^ner not only reasonably 

 wishes to make the most of his own, but also to build in such 

 a way as to best suit his requirements, which it is scarcely 

 likely would be exactly the same as those of a score or more 

 of adjoining owners. On the positive side it is also urged that 

 diversity of treatment is more pleasing to the eye, and palls 

 less quickly, than ordered symmetry ; but on this point there 

 is no likelihood of agreement. It is entirely a matter of per- 

 sonal idiosyncrasy. For my part, I would unhesitatingly give 

 it as my opinion that, of the two, the individual treatment is 

 the most suited to our habits, and that on the whole it will 

 produce the most artistic results. But, of course, this must 

 be taken with limitations: where no restriction exists as to 

 height of buildings it is quite possible that the whole effect of 

 a street may be ruined by the overpowering altitude of one or 

 two mammoth piles. This is especially noticeable in some 

 American cities, and may be seen to a less extent both in Mel- 

 bourne and Sydney. The limit of height should be that which 

 the majority of buildings are likely to attain ; and a municipal 

 regulation is therefore desirable not only on practical, but also 

 on artistic grounds. On this, however, let me make a sugges- 

 tion. To avoid the uniformity which such a limit would foster 

 I would allow the maxiDium height to be the average of the 

 whole front, and not that of any specific part. It would thus 

 be possible to keep one part of the building lower and the 

 other higher than the fixed line, and so afford more liberty of 

 internal planning and external design. And whenever such a 

 special feature as a tower, spire, turret, dome, or other ter- 

 minal is introduced, easy exemjjtion should be made in its 

 favour, as adding to the beauty and general interest of the 

 city. 



But there is one very prominent feature of the streets of 

 these sunny southern lands that cannot be ignored when con- 

 sidering their architectural treatment. Whatever the improve- 

 ment in the upper portions of the buildings, it goes for nought 

 so long as w'e have to endure the shed-like shelter known as a 

 street- verandah. It is a veritable hete noire to the architectural 

 reformer. In the first place, it is only permissive, as it i& 

 erected over the public way, and hence City Councils ordain 

 that it shall be of the slightest materials, such as iron and 

 wood. Then, it is not every building in a street which requires 

 one, and so, added to flimsiness, we have loss of continuity. And, 

 lastly, it is rarely of the same height for many houses together. 

 The result is utterly mean, and absolutely ruinous to architec- 



