163 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



JUNR, 



The power of the presses may l>e thus ealculiited : tlie area of t!ie 

 ram being' eijual to .'i37-6t circular inches, and the force actiuf? 

 u|i(in the plunijer eijual to'il+ tons per oircuhir iiiili, tlie two 

 lieintr multiplied together ^'we 722S tons, which is the fiu-ce of one 

 of the presses, and of the two presses li-15 tons. The actual weight 

 lifted was estimated at 1,300 tons. The quantity of water used 

 for each press is about 66 gallons. 



The tube was constructed on a platform erected on the shore of 

 the river, close to where it was to cross ; and when finished, si.v 

 pontoons, something similar to the large coal lighters on the river 

 Thames, were placed under the tube at low water, and which at 

 high water lifted the tulie oft' the piles upon which the stage was 

 erected. It was then floated to its destination, and ])laced between 

 the two towers, part of the masonry being left undone until the 

 tube was put into its proper position, and as it was raised the 

 masonry was built up under the tube. The time occujiied in raising 

 the tube and building up the masonry occupied four days; the 

 actual space lifted per hour was 13 feet. 



CANDIDUS'S NOTE-BOOK, 

 FASCICULUS LXXXII. 



"I must have liberty 

 Withal, as large a charter a- the winds, 

 To blow oil vvhoni I please." 



I. Surely there must be something wrong somewhere, when, not- 

 withstanding all the numerous appliances and aids which Architec- 

 tural study can now boast of. Architecture itself seems to have come 

 to a dead stand. In the inability to get a step forwards, a merit 

 is made of what an Irishman would call advancing backwards. To 

 say nothing of the Institute, we have besides that a Royal Academy, 

 which professes to extend its fostering protection to Architecture ; 

 also iVrchitectural Societies, Decorative Art Societies, Schools of 

 Design, and lastly, though not least. Professors of Architecture ; — 

 yet what is the art the better for them all ? Can it do more than 

 hash up again and again the cold remains of the banquets which it 

 used to serve up in by-gone ages ? If that " more" be not possible, 

 there is little cause for us to vapour at the rate we do about Archi- 

 tecture as one of the Fine Arts. Either it has now lost, or is no 

 longer permitted to exercise, the powers — to maintain the privi- 

 leges of one. After studying all extant styles of the art, we are 

 reduced to the mortifying conclusion, that we can do nothing what- 

 ever with any of them beyond copying, being ourselves wholly un- 

 able to catch and preserve the artistic sjiirit that pervades the 

 best and most characteristic examples of the styles which we pro- 

 pose to ourselves as models. By dint of pains-taking industry, we 

 can follow them tolerably well as far as they go; but where'they 

 stop short of what our actual purposes demand, we stop short too, 

 and break down ; and not only do they not go far enough for our 

 present requirements, but they sometimes lead us astray, forcing 

 more or less upon us that which is adopted merely because it is signi- 

 ficant of the style, although at the very same time much that is 

 incompatible with the style is tolerated on the score of necessity ; 

 so that, after all, it is generally suffered to be seen that there has 

 been conflict between style and purpose. Without such thorough 

 mastery over a style as can bend it, and render it quite plastic and 

 tractable, it is hardly possible to produce more than either direct 

 copies of former examples, or a sort of decent patchwork com- 

 posed out of them. As one of the Fine Arts, Architecture might 

 now very properly take for its motto, Fui : — " I was one once, but 

 am so no longer." 



II. It would not be amiss were some term introduced to distin- 

 guish those whom we now call Architects, from Builders, or else 

 to distinguish the Artist or Fine-Art Architect from him whose 

 practice and abilities do not extend beyond estimates, specifications, 

 the preparing working-drawings, and the superintending the exe- 

 cution of buildings. Why not have the term house-architect, as 

 well as house-painter, understanding l)v it those who make no 

 pretensions, or whose works do not qualify them to make any to 

 the more ambitious name of Architect in the sense of artist. At 

 present, all who come under the somewhat vague denomination of 

 Architects, assume to themselves the rank of artists — followers of 

 what is by common assent and the laxity of language admitted to 

 be a Fine Art. No doubt, such appellation (that of artist) is flat- 

 tering enough ; hut then it carries with it a corresponding degree 

 of responsibility. If it can be adequately supported, it is one of 



honour ; if not, it becomes one of reproach and disgrace. In not 

 being an artist there is no demerit ; but the preteTicling to pass for, 

 or at least rank as such, without possessing the least artistic talent, 

 is surely not very many removes from quackery. If there can be no 

 higher title than that of Architect for those — and they do not seem 

 to be many — who follow their profession in the spirit of artists, a 

 more modest designation would better become the majority, and 

 would relieve them from the sneers and reproaches to which they 

 now expose themselves. 



III. The idea of erecting single colossal columns as monuments 

 and architectural objects, was, no doubt, borrowed by the Romans 

 from Egyptian obelisks. Inasmuch as they are both lofty, upright 

 (dijects, exceedingly well calculated to show at a considerable dis- 

 tance, the column and obelisk agree ; but they also differ quite as 

 much, and the difference is decidedly in favour of Egytian taste. 

 ^V'hereas the obelisk is evidently a monument — a pillar erected to 

 record some fact or facts, or dignify some locality, and is everyway 

 fitted by its shajie to stand as an insulated, independent monolith, 

 the column ])lainly expresses itself to be a component member of a 

 fabric; therefore taken by itself alone, meaningless, — in the condi- 

 tion of a verb without a noun, or a noun without a verb. Not 

 only does the column suggest the idea of a superincumbent archi- 

 trave, for supporting which it is intended, — hut detached from it, 

 acqtiires a tophmvy and unstable look, the very reverse of that 

 attending the pi/rumidion in which the obelisk is made to terminate, 

 and which produces an obtuse apex, instead of the whole being 

 prolonged to a sharp point, like a spire. Except its general pro- 

 portions as to height, there is nothing that recommends a column 

 for officiating in lieu of an obelisk. The so employing it manifests 

 \ery great poverty of invention and barrenness of ideas, — the 

 inability to devise new and more appropriate forms for new pur- 

 poses. V\niat is characteristic in the column, considered as an 

 architectural member, destined to support either a horizontal enta- 

 blature or an arch springing from its capital, ceases to have pro- 

 ])riety or meaning in aj)illar erected merely as either an ornamental 

 object or a votive monument. Such monument may still be a 

 pillar, but it should be one expressly adapted to its peculiar pur- 

 pose ; therefore, the less it resembles any of the so-called " orders," 

 the better. In this respect, the Rostral column possesses a decided 

 advantage : it shows itself most plainly to be neither more nor 

 less than a tropin) pillar. A column of that kind does not look like 

 a fragment of a building. In a building, such form for the columns 

 would be preposterous. To employ Architectural columns as de- 

 tached monumental pillars, savours of pedantic and puerile conceit, 

 akin to that which during the Elizabethan period fashioned 

 chimney shafts into columns, designed, more orthodoxly than taste- 

 fully, according to some one of the " regular " orders. 



IV. It is very possible for a man to have too much scholarship, — 

 or to have it, if not too abundantly, too exclusively ; so much of 

 it, that he has no room in his head for any ideas of his own, nor 

 any time for exercising his thinking faculties. In Architecture, 

 scholarship is far more likely to prove injurious than at all pro- 

 fitable. ^V'hile with the ignorant it may pass for deep study, it 

 seldom amounts to more than idle display of learned frivolity ; 

 and is so far from really being study — that is, study to any pur- 

 pose — that it is rather apt to check the latter, to become the substi- 

 tute for it, and sometimes to lead astray into fancies as chimerical as 

 they are extravagant. Infinitely better would it have been for 

 'Wilkins, if, instead of laliouring' to convince us that the Temple 

 of Solomon was a building of the Grecian-Doric order, he had 

 applied himself to more diligent and real artistic study at his own 

 drawing-board. Pity that Solomon's temple, the tower of Babel, 

 and the Parthenon too, including a good many other things 

 besides, cannot be left at rest — or left to those who are more am- 

 bitious of displaying their pedantical erudition, than of contribut- 

 ing to, or in any way promoting artistic study— the very study of all 

 others in which we are most grossly deficient. Did we find that arch- 

 feological knowledge tends to enlarge thejudgment, and to fertilise 

 both talent and taste, it would deserve to be encouraged ; it seems, 

 however, to have quite a contrary efl^ect, — to contract instead of 

 at all expanding. Hence is it that copyism, which should be our 

 shame, is made our pride ; and much as we vapour about art — mere 

 empty vapouring after all — we show that we have no longer any 

 faith in it, but take it to he now actually paralyzed, and incapable 

 of doing aught further than it already has done. To revert to a 

 former style, for the jiurpose of yrudually moulding it into one 

 that shall be far more suitable to our present occasions and wants 

 than the original one is, would be allowable enough. But no : 

 that must not be done, — such mode of proceeding would be ac- 

 counted downright heresy. It would he tantamount to admitting, 

 that, excellent as former styles were for the times which produced 



