1839.] 



THE CTVIT> ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



143 



REVIEWS- 



A Letter to Lord Viscount Melbourne on the RehiiikUng of the lioyal 



Exchange. By Thomas Hopper, Architect. London : Wcale, 



1839. 



Professing to be upon the rebuildiHg of the Royal Exchange, this 

 pamphlet bears quite .as niiieh upon the Post-Otlice, or, m fact, the 

 latter is tlie principal subject, being tliat which isliere illustrated by five 

 plates, wherein the present edifice erected by Sir R. Smirke, and Mr. 

 Hopper's competition design for it are compared together, for the 

 purpose of showing how matters were managed on that occasion. 



Respecting competition generally, the writer says: "No Riodern work 

 stands sufficiently higli in public estimation to warrant the appointment 

 of any architect from his previous works, and competitions have been so 

 unfortunately conducted as to raise a strong feeling against them ; and 

 yet, that seems tlie most reasonable way of proceeding, if sufficient 

 precaution were used to prevent intrigue and jobbing." 



Now, in regard to intrigue and jobbing, we are of opinion they might 

 be effectually prevented, at least rendered almost next to impossible, by 

 adopting a properly devised system — thechief difficulty is how to enforce 

 such a system ; or, we may be wrong in calling that the chief difficulty, 

 when another most perplexing one remains, not to be got over by all 

 the fairness in tlie world ; for, supposing every thing to be conducted in 

 the most open and honourable manner, without either the slightest 

 wish to show favour to any one, or the possibility of doing so, still with 

 the very best intentions, and the determination to choose entirely accord- 

 ing to merit, the selection must depend upon the taste and judgment 

 of the umpires. So far there is a very great chance of error after all ; 

 nor will there beany remedy for it, until architecture itself shall become, 

 a branch of the fine arts, whicli is a very different thing from its 

 being taken up as a professional pursuit, one of the studies included in 

 a gentleman's education. Then, and not till then, can architecture be 

 properly encouraged, because, not till then, can talent manifested in it, 

 be appreciated by a sufficient number whose voices can be admitted as 

 those of a public competent to express their opinion, and to decide 

 between merit and mere pretension. In the mean while, and the 

 sooner a beginning is made the better, something maybe done towards 

 establishing a fairer and more effectual system of competition. Perhaps, 

 were the following regulations adopted, the evil now complained of 

 would be in a great measure removed : — First, it should be imperative 

 that all the design? should be drawn to one scale, and merely shaded ; 

 and that all perspective views accompanying them should be taken from 

 the same station or stations. Next, that in case ofmodels, all should like- 

 wise be made to one scale, andeachaccompanied with a perspective view, 

 showing what would be its appearance when executed, and seen in 

 combination with the buildings or other objects belonging to the pro- 

 posed site ; because in themselves models are most fallacious, and more- 

 over captivate and delude the eye by a certain pre/</nfSS that would not 

 belong to the buildings erected from them. Next, it should be made an 

 invariable rule that the designs should be publicly exhibited before 

 any one be selected, or any premiums awarded. This would save an im- 

 mense deal of trouble to the Selecting Committee, inasmuch as they 

 would be able to compare the designs more leisurely, and also have the 

 benefit of learning public opinion in regard to them ; not that they need, 

 therefore, be aosolutely dictated to by that, should they have sufficient 

 reasons for dissenting from it. This parliamentary ordeal being gone 

 through, the next step woidd be to select a certain number of designs of 

 the greatest mark and likelihood, and closely investigate their merits, 

 throwing out from time to time such as appeared less eligible, until 

 only two or three remained for final choice and decision, after diligent 

 inquiry into their respective claims. Nor ought such decision to be 

 reported to the public merely in its result, but the votes — Ayes and 

 Noes — ought to bespecifically recorded ; since each individual would then 

 feel himself responsible for his own opinion, while another advantage 

 would be that incompetent persons would be rather more shy than at 

 present of putting themselves upon such committees, more especially if 

 each member were compelled to allege his reasons for his decision, in 

 writing. 



Like many other excellent schemes, this of ours may be too Utopian 

 to be adopted, neither do we recommend it with any such expectation, 

 but simply with the view of showing, that, were there a sincere disposi- 

 tion to manage such matters fairly and honourably, and not only 

 honourably, but without even any suspicion of intrigue, it would 

 not be quite so difficult to devise an effective system as is now generally 

 imagined. Tlie public exhibition of the designs for the Nelson Monu- 

 ment, by showing the utility of affording the public an opportunity of 

 expressing their opinion, wliile it can be ofl^ered in the shape of remon- 

 strance instead of unavailing reproach is a case in point. Another, and 

 nottlie lea,st advanUge which might fairly be anticipated from the system 

 No, 19.— Vol, II,— Apbil, 1839. 



above recommended, is that incompetent persons would be deterred from 

 entering into competition, beingtolerablyaware that there would belittle 

 chance of success for them, were it made an inviolable rule to exhibit all 

 the designs publicly beforehand ; or even of any notice, except for their 

 decided inferiority. On the other hand, it would operate asastimulus 

 to men of talent, because, whether ultimately successful or not, they 

 might distinguish themselves with t'cto, and obtain numerous suff'rages 

 from the public. 



But we seem almost to have forgotten Mr. Hopper ; therefore let us 

 now resume, by saying that he holds up as a warning the proceedings 

 connected with the competition fur the Post-Office, for which building 

 he himself sent in a design. Wherefore he should now for the first time 

 bring that matter thus publicly forward, is easily explained. In fact, the 

 secret belonging to it has been recently divulged by no other tlian Mr. 

 Sidney Smirke, the architect's brother, and the author of the account 

 of the Post-Office, in Leeds's new edition of the Illustrations of the 

 Public Buildings of London, where it forms one of the new subjects, and ^ 

 the only one of them not described by the editor himself In that 

 account Mr. S. Smirke has very incautiously made a disclosure, that 

 while it shows how unfairly all the competitors were treated, reflects no 

 very great credit on Sir Robert himself, beca*ise, we are informed that 

 lie did not gain the preference by any superiority of talent he had 

 manifested; but, none of the designs sent in being found exactly suitable, 

 " to relieve themselves from this embarrassment the Lords of the Trea- 

 sury commissioned Sir Robert (then Mr.) Smirke, who had not himself 

 hitherto entered into the field, to make himself thoroughly acquainted 

 with the business of the Post-Office, and to make the experience so 

 acquired the foundation of a plan for the new building." Coming from 

 such source the truth of this admits of no doubt, but it is a most extra- 

 ordinary instance of sincerity. We certainly do not mean to insinuate 

 that Sir Robert himself was reprehensible on that occasion, but it is 

 clear enough that he was favoured to injury of others ; since, surely if 

 a fresh design was absolutely requisite, the proper course would have 

 been to have commissioned the author of the best one that had been 

 sent in, "to make /nmse//' thoroughly acquainted with the business of 

 the Post-Office ;" and then, either modifying his first plans accordingly, 

 or else layingthem aside, to prepare an entirely new design. 



Whether accidental or not, there is certainly a strong general re- 

 semblance between Mr. Hopper's faoade and the one erected. The order 

 is the same, and the chief difference is that the former has a much greater 

 number of columns, the portico being octastyle, the end pavilions hexa- 

 style, and the intermediate parts decorated with half columns ; the 

 pavilions also form porticos, with an entrance in each of them. Still, 

 as rcards the centre portico, we prefer the one executed, because no 

 windows are introduced into it ; but, as to the respective plans, we think 

 that more might have been made of Mr. Hopper's, where a wide central 

 corridor runs through the centre of the building from wing to wing 

 transversely, to the great hall, in passing through which a fine architec- 

 tural vista would have presented itself on each side, provided, that 

 avenue (upwards of 300 feet long) had been suitably embellished and 

 the light thrown down from above at each extremity of it. 



We presume that the other elevation by Mr. Hopper, here published 

 " in the style of a favourite design," is intended, whether satirically or 

 not, to alhide to Mr. Barry's design for the terrace-front of the new 

 houses of Parliament. 



The London and Birmingham Bailwa'./. By Thomas Roscoe, Esq. 

 assisted by Peter Lecount, Esq., F.R.A.S., Civil Engineer; loith 

 a Map of the Line, 18 fine steel plates, and numerous wood 

 engravings. London : Charles Tilt. Birmingham : Wrightson 

 and Webb. 



We have several times made extracts from this very interesting 

 work, which is of that sterling character that it may be read with 

 ]ileasure cither by the professional or general reader. The descrip- 

 tion of the immense works carried on during the progress of the 

 railway shows the vast expense, great outlay, and antagonist difficul- 

 ties with which railway companies have had to contend from the 

 first projection of the company to the conclusion of the work. It 

 also shows with what great perseverance it was necessary to combat 

 the bigoted prejudices of various parties, some even interested in 

 the progress of railways. We have read the work with considerable 

 pleasure, and doubt not that it will be perused by our subscribers 

 wilh equal interest, while, to give a specimen of the general cha- 

 racter of the volume, we shall occasionally give a few more extracts. 

 The plates and wood engravings (we ought perhaps to have men- 

 tioned before) arc particularly deserving of notice, as they illustrate 

 the description and show some of the stupendous works on the rail- 

 way, the map at the commencement, reduced from Cheffin's large 

 official map, will be found particularly useful to the traveller. Before 



