IS4d; 



THE CIVIL ENGINKER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



203 



tliis important point, the works of the artists of the revival ahove 

 alluded to (thoiijih masters of perspective and perspective effects) 

 afford innumerable instances ; while of consummate skill and 

 science in nieetinjj- these requirements, the inimitable productions 

 of the Grecian chisel afford at once a most striking example, and 

 to the artist an invaluable model for study. 



An important part of the subject of the application of sculpture 

 to architecture is the employment of caryatides in the place of 

 the column to support the entablature of the orders. Whether the 

 origin of this feature be that related by Vitruvius, or whether it 

 resulted merely in the fertile and lively imagination of tlie artist 

 adopting this form for variety only, it will hardly be worth our 

 while to consider; though the employment of the human figure 

 combined with massive columns, but not aiding in the support of 

 the mass above, occurring in the Egyptian temples, might induce 

 the belief that the idea has been already suggested by precedent, 

 aud that the character it assumed in Grecian architecture was 

 merely the result of the more refined taste of the artist. The 

 instances in which they were employed, and the manner in which 

 they have been treated, has been already considered, as also that of 

 the same feature by the artists of the revival in Italy. It has else- 

 where been but very sparingly adopted. Jean Goujon has left us 

 some admirable specimens of his taste and skill in the Louvre at 

 Paris, which exhibit all the chaste and refined feeling of the 

 antique combined with the freedom of the revival. Inigo Jones's 

 circular court of caryatides, in the Palace at Whitehall, though 

 not e.xecuted, yet forms so beautiful a feature in the design that 

 we must not omit to notice it, and to observe with what peculiar 

 judgment the architect has treated this feature of his design : by 

 applying it to an interior court, a perfectly unique effect is pre- 

 served, undisturbed by comparison in size with the columnar ar- 

 rangement. 



It is obvious that, in a great measure, the same rules will regu- 

 late the treatment of caryatides which govern the application of 

 sculpture generally to architecture ; viz., a general sobriety of 

 treatment ; tlie avoiding all strained and unnatural positions of 

 the limbs ; no flutter or discomposure of the drapery ; the figure 

 balancing itself most accurately, and appearing in every position 

 in the most perfect equilibrium ; the outline of the limbs being 

 clearly developed through the folds of the drapery; and, lastly, 

 the absence of the idea of forced and laborious exertion on the one 

 hand, and of positive inaction on the other, that the figure appear 

 easily and naturally to support its superincumbent members, and 

 that they be so treated that the same outline and position do not 

 recur too often. If engaged with the wall, as is frequently the 

 case, a greater freedom of treatment may undoubtedly be adopted, 

 since the outline of the figure will not vary much in different 

 points from which it can be seen. 



It might at first be supposed that the study and practice of two 

 arts, so intimately connected with each other, and so naturally 

 and readily combined, might have been united with advantage in 

 the same artist. If, however, we look back upon the history of 

 art, more particularly to the era of the revival in Italy, at which 

 time they were not uncommonly united in the same individual, we 

 cannot but observe that the abuses and deformities are principally 

 to be met with in the works of the architect-sculptors; and that 

 in artistic effect and arrangement, as well as in appropriate and 

 characteristic detail, they were surpassed by their brethren, the 

 architect-painters of the same period. However, they both fall 

 short of those whose whole attention was devoted to architecture 

 alone ; showing, more conclusively than argument, that the rules 

 of the artist must, in these points, be his non imperitus; that to 

 compass more than one to its fullest extent — to attain to or approach 

 perfection, where the attention is divided upontwo objects of equal 

 importance and scope, — is beyond the grasp of the most powerful 

 intellect, and that the attempt can only be attended with failure 

 in one, or mediocrity in both. There may be quoted a few brilliant 

 exceptions ; yet, if these even be fairly balanced upon their own 

 merits, irrespective of the authority of great names, the observa- 

 tion may apply to them. 



In conclusion, although it might seem that the rules to be ob- 

 served in applying sculpture to architecture are rigid, and calculated 

 to trammel the artist with restrictions incompatible with the free 

 exercise of his genius, there is, in reality, perhaps no point on 

 which the invention of the artist is less fettered, or on which so 

 wide a field is left for tlie exercise of his own discretion, since 

 they determine no fixed proportions, prescribe no particular form, 

 arrangement, or detail, and tlieir very application must depend on 

 the artist's discernment and taste. How little these rules are cal- 

 culated to induce poverty and tameness of design, or confine tlie 

 free exercise of the imagination, the example of the gifted artists 



of Greece will sufficiently prove. The rules of art, so called, are 

 not arbitrary restriction founded on the caprice of fashion, the 

 authority of precedent, or the practice of approved masters, — but 

 those immutable laws, upon the observance of which beauty, 

 grandeur, and harmony most depend (which admit of no excep- 

 tion), apply to every variation of circumstances ; are ascertained 

 by an accurate observation of the effects of certain combinations ; 

 and are as inseparably connected with the productions of certain 

 results as cause and effect in mechanical appliances in the physical 

 world. It is the attribute and characteristic of true genius io- 

 tuitively to know, and instinctively to apply them, however neces- 

 sary experience, careful observation, and diligent study may be to 

 mature the judgment and refine the taste. To conform to them 

 will exercise its ingenuity rather than restrict its powers, while 

 their due observance will give force and precision to its efforts, 

 by directing them in the right channel, and by preserving it from 

 those irregularities which mar the productions of genius unaided 

 by experience and education. 



RESISTANCES TO RAILWAY TRAINS. 



EXPERIMENTS DOWN INCLINED PLANES BY GRAVITY. 



Some experiments have recently been made on the retardation 

 of trains on inclined planes; and as the subject has been much 

 debated, a brief analysis of the results may be acceptable, — an 

 account of the experiments themselves will be found at the end of 

 this paper. It is to be observed, that the circumstances under 

 which they appear to have been conducted, render uniformity 

 and certainty in the conclusions from them very difficult, or rather 

 absolutely impossible. 



In the first place, to get a general law of resistance by experi- 

 ments on inclined planes, it is absolutely requisite that the line 

 should be straight, the air calm, and the distance traversed con- 

 siderable. Of the resistance of curves, and wind in motion, 

 nothing can be known till the resistance in more simple cases be 

 ascertained. To begin with the more complex enquiry is to 

 entangle the subject with phenomena, respecting which igno- 

 rance virtually is confessed, by the very circumstance of making 

 the experiment. 



Again, it is imperatively necessary that the distance traversed 

 should be considerable — and we urge this point the more strongly, 

 because it applies, not only to the present experiment, but also to 

 former experiments on the narrow-gauge railways. The report to 

 the British Association on Railway Resistances (1837) contains the 

 following important remark on this head : — 



"In every case hitherto examiaed, the unifurm velocity which may ap- 

 pear to have beeu attaioed iiuder such cirouiiistaaces, is somewhat less 

 than that attained on the same plane, when the train has coniiiienced the 

 descent at a considerable velocity ; it may therefore be doubted, if trains 

 which may appear to have attained an uniform velocity after starting from 

 a slate of rest (on planes on which the experiments have been made), 

 may not really be travelling at a very slowly accelerating velocity, and 

 as the lengths of such planes of one inclination do not enable this to be 

 ascertained with certainty, it has been deemed better to exclude such 

 results. The same rule has been followed for similar reasons in aoalysiug 

 the other series of experiments on inclined planes referred to in this 

 paper." 



This remark appears to apply to the experiments before us, and 

 also to those undertaken by Mr. Wyndham Harding, on the Croy- 

 don Atmospheric Railway. Of course, it is only where the mass or 

 the train is small, that the resistance soon begins to tell ; the effect 

 of the inertia of large trains travelling at high velocities, is best 

 seen by considering the distance they will move when subject to 

 the enormous pressure of the break. 



The present experiments being subject to these various sources 

 of error, exhibit discrepancies which greatly diminish the value 

 of the conclusions indicated. For instance, in each of the first 

 nine experiments (except the Gth and 8th, which may be altoge- 

 ther disregarded on account of the disadvantageous circumstances 

 under which they were conducted), there occurs a sudden and un- 

 explained increase of velocity at the distance 85i. This may, 

 perhaps, be attributable to local circumstances ; but what is more 

 important, is the fact that the alteration of the gradient from ^j, 

 to gj5, makes no perceptible alteration of the speed in five out of 

 the seven trustworthy experiments on those gradients. This con- 

 sideration furnishes a convincing proof of the danger of drawing 

 deductions from the apparent uniformity of motion for short dis- 

 tances. If the resistance in pounds per tou for a given velocity 



27* 



