GENERAL POSTSCRIPT. 41 



I know of no objection that has been made to any thing 

 that I have afferted on this head, except to that part in which 

 I have exploded Viftas and Avenues, which, it has been faid, 

 have in themfelves a confiderable mare of intrinfic beauty. I 

 am myfelf far from denying this ; 1 only affert that their 

 beauty is not picturefque beauty ; and therefore, that it is to 

 be rejected by thofe who follow picturefque principles. It is 

 architectural beauty, and accords only with architectural 

 works. Where the Artifl follows thofe principles, viftas 

 ,are certainly admiflible ; and the French, who have fo long 

 followed them, have therefore not improperly (though one 

 cannot help fmiling at the title) given us in their Dictionary 

 of Sciences, an article of Architecture du Jardinage. But did 

 Gafpar PoufTm, or Claude Lorrain, ever copy thefe beauties 

 on their canvas ? Or would they have produced a picturefque 

 effect by their means if they had ? I think this iingle con- 

 fideration will induce every perfon of common tafte to allow 

 that thefe two principles oppofe one another, and that, when- 

 ever they appear together, they offend the eye of the beholder 

 by their heterogeneous beauty : If therefore viftas are ever to 

 be admitted, or rather to be retained, it is only where they 

 form an approach to fome fuperb manfion, fo fituated, that 



G the 



