30 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



sion. By some en-nr of the oolourist, llic Oxford and Diidcot branch 

 is represented as if it had obtained parlianicnlaiy sanction, and we 

 observe that this and sonic other minor proposed Hnes, as the Har- 

 wich are inserted, while others in agitation, as the St. fieorgc's 

 Harbour, Morecambe Bay, i;c., are omitted. ^\ e suppose that llie 

 London Grand .Junction is left out on account of llic expiration of the 

 act. We are t,'lad to perceive that an announcement in the prospectus 

 i;s to all the levels being reduced to that of low water at Liverpool is 

 incorrect, all hough it would be advantagco\is if the datum were 

 taken from the Trinity standard, as that of tlie longitude is from 

 (ireenwich. 



In conclusion, we may award the meed of approlmlion to this 

 work, as being one of great practical utility, and conferring higli 

 honour on its compiler. It is most appropriately deflieated, by per- 

 mi^sion, to .lames Walker, the President of the Institution of Civil 

 Engineers ; and thus, while it acquires a higher v.due with the 

 public, pays an honourable tribute to the exertions of that gen- 

 tleman. 



LITERARY NOTICES. 



Thi Monthly Chronicle, with an article on the Great Western Railway ques- 

 tion, has ht'iw sent to us, but we have not thouglit it necessary to extract iVom 

 it, as tlie matter seems only a ililatation of Mr. Wood's report, puhlislied by 

 us in our present number. As to the arsoment pursued by the well-linomi 

 autlior, relative to atmospheric resistance, he shows too uuich doubt hiuiself of 

 its feasibility by the intercalation of the phrase "in the present state of science," 

 to render it necessary for us to refute it. Perhaps the author may do so 

 himself; at any rate the present experiments are evidently incomplete, and it 

 does not follow that a ratio of resistance existing at a certain period should 

 continue nuiform throughout. This resistance, as well as others, may be 

 subji^ct to the cyclar law of variation, and lilie the velocitv of boats on canals 

 become more favourable at a higlterspeed. 



That vnliiable and cheap compilation, U'l/ld's Muiithh/ Imkx (u the Times 

 Nin'siviper, has with the new year increased the sphere of its labours, and is 

 enlar.;ed to an Inilrx to tlie Metropolitan Morninff Papers, Times, Chronicle, 

 Nertilil, Post, nnd Advertiser. It gives fur the same price as before, 10,000 

 distinct references to 3,000 heads, and presents such a mass of figures, that 

 •were it not for the clearness of the arrangement, it would be sufficient to 

 repulse the reader. The address contains some most interesting remarks, 

 and the work itself is of that utility that no man of business should be with- 

 out it. 



Our attention has been called to a pamphlet entitled, Hints on the uduplion 

 of the Broad Gauije on the Great Western Railway, by Traffic ; but as it is only 

 a puff of a proposed line, repeating oft-refuted assertions, we do not think it 

 necessary " tn buniish the refined giild." 



We have examined the last three parts of Dr. Ure's Vielionnrt/, and we feel 

 pleased to see that it still maintains its high character for utility. In the last 

 cuinb-r, which is the fifth, is an interesting table of chemical foimulie, and an 

 excellent account of the nuiinifaclure of gas, which we should be tempted to 

 exUact, were we not assured that most of our readers have provided them- 

 selves Willi the original work, so that it would be lil;e carrying coals to New- 

 castle. We see that the Doctor promises a new work on chemistry, which we 

 h;iv.^ linle do\ibt will be, like his other compilations, a valuable addition to the 

 (tock of science. 



s> e shali refer to Danj on Foundations in our next Journal. 



ORIGINAL PAPERS, COMMUNICATIONS, &c. 



RALPH REDIVIVUS.— No. J3. 



THE EXCISE OFFICE. 



Most persons, I am inclined to suspect, employ certain current 

 epithets and plnascs, either without attaching any meaning at all to 

 them, or else a very false one. One of the cant terms thus bandied 

 ahout is ^iniplidly ; but when yon ask what is meant by simplicity, you 

 are stared at as being a most dunce-brained ignoramus, or an exceed- 

 ingly disagreeable and impertinent bore. The result of all your 

 inquiries and cross-questioning will be, that simplicity is simplicity, 

 notl.ing more nor less, and tliat you must be a prodigious simpleton 

 not to understand it. Perhaps, the better definition would be that it is a 

 quality which everybody admires, or pretends to admire, which most 

 jjeoiile fancy they can see where it does e.\ist, and which very few can 

 perceive when it is actually before their eyes. 



That it exists, for the most part, only iu the imagination, or, perhaps, 

 Oidy upon the tongue, can hardly be denied, when we consider the sort 

 of things which are prai>ed for theirsimplicity, although more frequently 

 than not, they are mongrel compounds most cliunsiiy put together : for 

 irinauce, a didl school-boy copy of a portico, (that is, of a few columns 

 with an entablature and pediment — tied to a building where it is not only 

 Biipcrfluous as far as utility is concerned, but worse than superfluous, a 



positive absurdity as regards consistency of style, or even mere artistical 

 etTect), shall be admired for its simplicity, although it ought ratherto be 

 reprobated as a vulgar aU'ectati(Ui and absurdity, manifesting notliing 

 so much as sheer obtnseness of taste, and utter sterility of ideas. On 

 the other hand, tliat it cannot he perceived or estimated when actually 

 placed before people's eyes can liardly be denied, when we consider 

 how ill we appreciate an edifice that, for its dignified simplicity and 

 nnati'ected nobleness of expression, has not its equal in the metropolis. I 

 mean the Ex( ise Offic e . Let any one, after looking at the tawdry insigni- 

 ficance of the columned tarades iu the Rcgent's-park, go and contemplate 

 the uiiprctending grandein- of the edifice in Broad-sticet,and hecannot 

 fail to be struck with the vast superiority of tiie latter, and with the 

 imposing presence it makes. If such rcallv be the case, it will be said, 

 how happens it that its merits have been overlooked, and that no one 

 ever refers to it as a piece of architecture ? Is not that extraordinary? 

 7'ovt an cotitraire ; that it should be neglected is quite in the ordinary 

 course of things. It is marked by no striking features, much less does 

 it recommend itself to the vulgar eye, by any of tiiose prettinesses 

 which arc almost sure to command vulgar applause. Its value lies in 

 character and expression, and in its totality of effect, qualities which, it 

 would seem, arc altogether caviare to the million. Besides which it is 

 not, like St. Bride's steeple, one of those things for which the good 

 citizens are tauglit from their infancy to entertain traditional admiration. 

 While it is too old to be stared at as a modern improvement it is not 

 old enough to be gaped at as being of longstanding and universal note. 

 Above all, it has never, like some productions greatly inferior to it, had 

 the good luck to have a current reputation given it, by any generally 

 recognized critical authority. 



Nevertheless, all honour be to James Gandon, for in what he has 

 here achieved, he has shown the true feeling of a master. It is, 

 indeed, almost the only thing in all London that really looks like a 

 palace, or that is worthy to pass for one. That erected, in evil hour, by 

 Nash, admits of no comparison with this edifice, for greatness of manner, 

 and stateliuess of appearance. There, every part has a squeezed-up, 

 little, and finical look ; and, notwithstanding that there is a good deal of 

 embellishment, or what is intended as sucTi, the building has not the 

 slightestair of richness; neither does it offer anything that can properly 

 he termed variety ; but, contradictory as it may sound, is stamped by 

 insuff'erable monotony, although it exhibits nothing whatever of unity. 



It is absolutely refreshing to turn from Nash's architectural 

 Micronwyus to this work of Gandon's, where the eye reposes with 

 prolonged satisfaction on the breadth and e/randiose physiognomy of 

 the ensemble; to which all the proportions very happily contribute. 

 Considerable as is the extent of front, it is not so great as in any degree 

 to counteract the expression of'umisnal loftiness, which may be said to 

 be the predominating one ; and what conduces not a little to it is that 

 there arc no horizontal members dividing the height, and cutting it up 

 into a succession of distinct compartments from the ground to the 

 summit. If we compare it in this respect with Inigo Jones's building 

 at Whitehall, we can hardly help feeling the great superiority of 

 Gandon's. There, we behold a diminutive basement, and two small 

 orders without any crowning member to give importance to the summit 

 of the edifice ; here, a basement of unusual loftiness comprising two 

 series of windows, and above it a principal and secondary floor 

 surmounted by the cornice that crowns the entire mass. Without 

 thereby losing any of the consequence it derives from height, the 

 first-mentioned portion of the structure acquires more importance in 

 the design from the variety thrown into it, owing to the modes of rusti- 

 cating employed, that below being of a more masculine character than 

 the other. Nor is variety the only merit arising from this combination, 

 because, to my eye at least, the upper part of the basement thus forms 

 an agrceJble transition from the more massive substructure to the more 

 finished superstrnctuie. This duplication of the basement is, besides, 

 excellently well-motived by the lofty arch, which is so effective a feature 

 in the whole composition. Substitute an ordinary sized doorway for 

 it — either in idea or upon paper, and it will instantly be evident how 

 greatly all the rest would suffer by such alteration alone. Another, 

 circumstance that mainly contributes to the air of external grandeur 

 and internal spaciousness which distinguishes this piece of architecture 

 consists in the proportions between the solids and apertures. Even in 

 some parts of Somerset-house, a certain petifesse prevails, owing to the 

 windows being too numerous for the surface they occupy ; besides 

 which the intermixture of windows with dressings and others without 

 them, upon the same floor produces a patchy and parsimonious appear- 

 ance. Here, on the contrary, the apertures are admirably propor> 

 tioned to the whole facade, are cfTective but not obtrusive features — 

 and although far t'rom petty in themselves — subservient to the larger 

 Sliaces; whereas in the building by Jones before alluded to, the 

 windows predominate too much, and cause the columns and pilasters 

 to appear diminutive in comparisou with them. 



