1830.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



85 



building, not where they c;m be seen, and convey such information at 

 a single glance, but where they must remain unseen for ever, namely, 

 on the foundation-sl^ne. Surely this practice must have been of 

 Irish origin, since a more blunderinsj one, and one more contrary to 

 the plainest common sense, can hardly be conceived. It is all very 

 well to bury under ground the names of lord mayors, or other official 

 worthies and dignitaries who ax.si.st at the ceremony of laying the first 

 stone, because it matters not how soon they and everything relating 

 to the childish silver trowel part of the business are forgotten ; but 

 that there should ever be any mystery, or roemi for doubt, as to who 

 was really the architect of a building, when all uncertainty might be 

 obviated by a mere name and date, is quite preposterous. Besides 

 which, it is very likely to happen, and often does happen, that a 

 structure is either rebuilt, or nearly, on its old foundations, and in 

 such cases what becomes of the veracity of the inscription on the 

 foundation-stone, should it ever come to light at all ! Of this we 

 have two notable instances in the Custom-house and the College of 

 Surgeons, one of which has been, though only partially, altered so 

 greatly for the worse from its original design, bad as that design was ; 

 and the other so metnmorphosed from its original ugliness, as to be no 

 longer the same buildings they first were. Had architects invariably 

 made it the practice to afKx their names to their works, we should now be 

 at no loss to know who we are indebted to for those noble fabrics of 

 olden time, which are the admiration of all. Why it should not be 

 done I do not understand, \A'hen every engraver put his name to the 

 plates he executes. Neither would there be any occasion that the 

 architect's name should be ostentatiously displayed; for were it cut 

 merely on the lintel or architrave of a door, the plat-band above a 

 basement, or some member of that kind, it would not obtrude itself 

 on the eye, nor discover itself till sought for. 



III. It looks somewhat like inconsistency, that at the very time 

 they wish architectiu'e should be ranked as one of the fine arts, pro- 

 fessional men should lay so much stress as they do, not merely upon 

 the practical but upon the mere business-like part of it. Should you 

 happen to express your surprise that Mr. Such-a-one obtains so 

 much employment, when he has on no single occasion shown any 

 talent, perhaps the reply will be, " Oh, but he is a most excellent 

 man of business ;" the plain English of which is, that let architects 

 fancy themselves what they may, the public consider them in no other 

 light than tradesmen; and in nine cases o>it of ten the public may 

 be perfectly right. By no means do I assert that talent never finds 

 employment, but it will, I believe, generally be found that it is the 

 very last thing that recommends a man to it. 



IV. That the Elizabethan style possesses historical interest I do 

 not dispute,but that it offers any beauties oradvantages torecommend 

 it as a mode of architecture is wdiat I must be allowed most flatly 

 to deny. Its only principle is the disregard of all architectural prin- 

 ciples, and of all artistic feeling. "Very seldom do we meet with 

 anything in it that can be termed really good, even estimated accord- 

 ing to what may considered the leading taste of the examples them- 

 selves ; or if there happen to be some particular feature that satisfies 

 the eye, it is a mere solitary bit hi the composition — although it is 

 rather an abuse of term so to employ it — without anything to har- 

 monise with it. Besides which, notwithstanding their licentiousness 

 of design, the examples of this style betray great dearth of ideas and 

 poverty of imagination ; for, be it observed, there is a most wide dif- 

 ference between whimsies and fancies and fancy itself. I have met 

 with some people who, in aiming at being amusingly lively, have 

 only been impertinently fiisky : nor is it a small degree of awkward 

 friskiness that characterises the style in question, and causes it to 

 appear even more dull than it else might. It is no more than right 

 tiiat we should know what it really was; but its examples ought to 

 be held in lerrorem., certainly not for imitation, except it be that spe- 

 cies of imitation which enables an artist to appropriate wdiat is availa- 

 ble for better purposes, rejecthig all the dross. Yet those who have 

 of late served up this style to us have generally taken care to give us 

 garbage and all. Certainly no one has hitherto attempted to discri- 

 minate between its best and worst qualities, or to point out what it 

 offers for adaptation to our present purposes ; since, leaving taste 

 entirely out of the question, it has nothing whatever to recommend it 

 as a mode of building adapted to our present habits and tastes ; cer- 

 tainly nothing on the score of comfort and convenience, on that of 

 economy perhaps even less, since it is only lavish profusion of de- 

 coration tliat can conceal its native ugliness. I may be told that it 

 is a truly national style, that of our ancestors : national nonsense ! 

 So were trunk-hose and cumbersome ruffs at one time our national 

 dress, yet what man — I do not say of sense, but in his senses — would 

 wear them now, unless determined to establish, for himself, at all 

 hazards, a character for singularity ? We do nothing else like our 

 ancestors; then why, in the name of common sense, should we put 

 ourselves into their most grotesque and unseemly architectural 



fashions ? I have been led to these remarks by looking over the first 

 number of Richardson's " Architectural Remains ;" which work 

 professes to give only the choicest specimens of the Elizabethan pe- 

 riod ; and is therefore likely to effect good, by exposing the unmitigated 

 deformity that prevails even in what we must presume to be com- 

 paratively pure in taste, and happy in invention. It is a pity Mr. 

 Richardson, who, of course, thinks very highly of John Thorpe's ar- 

 chitectural taste, should not think sufficiently well of John Britton''^ 

 literary taste as to take that learned sexagenarian's dedication to the 

 queen as a model for his own. In regard, however, to the style — I 

 do not mean of sexagenarian's dedications, but of Elizabethan ar- 

 chitecture — I conceive it would be a far nobler object of ambition in 

 the profession to aim at fonning what might hereafter be distin- 

 guished as the Victorian, than to content themselves with aping wliat 

 is called the Elizabethan. 



V. Gwynn's "London and Westminster Improved" is pretty well 

 known to every one by name, but it is not, perhaps, so generally 

 known that that writer is apt to be occasionally rather satiric. 

 The following remarks, for instance, are somewhat in the spirit of 

 Boz. " The powers of inventive genius are at this time so very little 

 attended to, and the examples of Greece and Rome so firmly esta- 

 blished, that nothing more is required to model a youth of moderate 

 parts into a complete architect, than to put him ajqirentice to a brick- 

 layer, mason, or carpenter, under whose tuition he will acquire the 

 great art of scoring straight lines, and setting off their proportions by 

 scale and compasses. His servitude being ended, thus accompdished 

 and furnished with the rudiments of architecture, he may be sent to 

 Rome, and after he has spent the u^ual time for traversing that city, 

 he may cause it to be inserted in the London papers, that Mr. Trowel, 

 the celebrated architect, on account of his vast abilities, has had pro- 

 digious honours conferred upon him, and that he shortly intends to 

 revisit his native country, to which he will no doubt do infinite ho- 

 nour." This, it must beallowed, is tolerably Bozziih, and convinces 

 us that quackery was understood before our own time. "But to be se- 

 rious," he continues, " where is the necessity for this parade of going 

 to Rome ? Is there a building, or even a f'ragm.ent of a building in 

 Greece, or Italy, of which we have not accurate draughts and mea- 

 sures ? and is it not from these resources that ever;/ modern building 

 is compiled, without variation, and without the least attempt at no- 

 velty or invention ? It is very much to be questioned, if such an 

 attempt was to be made, whether a thorough-bred connoisseur would 

 vouchsafe to bestow a second look upon such a design." That 

 Gwynn must have been a brave fellow ! And yet, he might as well 

 have " whistled to the winds," as attempt to correct the inveterate 

 pedantry of " thorough-bred connoisseurs," and the servile common- 

 place routine of architects. What inconceivable magnitude of talent 

 it must require to be able to follow a pattern, and make an exact copy 

 of cohirans, and things of t'nat sort ! Is not that exactly your opinion 

 " My Public" ? Aye, to be sure it is. 



PLAN FOR A HARBOUR AT HASTINGS. 



BV A SERIES OF PROGRESSIVE IMPROVEMENTS. 



By John Kooke, Esq., Author of" Geology as a Science," &c. &c. 

 Applied to EtigiucL'iing. 



The plan of a harbour for Hastings, noticed in " The 

 Civil Engineer and Architect's Journal," vol. I, page .338, being 

 closely associated with the course of the tides in the l?ritish Channel, 

 so must the tideway be first considered; as upon the influence of 

 these tides, and the projections of laud upon the line of shore,^ 

 depends the success or failure of artificial works for the shelter of 

 sea vessels. To the deeps of the Atlantic Ocean, the origin of tides 

 in the British Channel may be distinctly traced; the line of tidal 

 current is, therefore, from the westward, terminating in the strait of 

 Dover, and there meeting the opposing balance of a tidewave from 

 the North Sea. In the western section of the British Channel, the 

 force of flood tides propelled eastward by a powerful pressure from 

 the Atlantic Ocean, as a result of fluid action, drives beds of shingle 

 forwards, which are necessarily deposited in the eastern section 

 thereof, since the force of the reflux tides is less than that of the 

 flux tides. As Hastings is situated in the eastern section of the 

 British Channel, and not far distant from the terminus of a tidewave, 

 which has a general course parallel to the trending of the sliorc, so 

 shinn-le has a decided tendency to drive eastward, and convert 

 harbours lying in its course into what have been designated" shingle 

 traps." The cause of this result is plain. If the North Irish 

 Channel, where the tidewave is continuous, be compared to the 

 eastern section of the British Channel, where the tidewave termi- 

 nates, we observe a marked difference. In the one, drift is propelled 

 onwards, and deep water preserved, because a continuous scour 

 prevails; while, in the other case, the scour terminates, and the thift 



