296 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



|_AUGUST, 



tural societies almost innumerable; — nevertheless and notwith- 

 standing; all these favourable symptoms, architectural study — at 

 any rate, architectural publishinj,^ is now at the lowest ehl>. Yet, 

 hardly is it because we in this country are so poor that we cannot 

 afford to iudulije in those book-luxuries, which our certainly not 

 wealthier continental neighbours do. The plain truth is, that 

 notwithstamliiiK all our present chattering about art, we know 

 nothing about it, and care less : — now, if any one calls that a biitl^ 

 I return the coni])liment, by calling him a great citlf. 



VI. If architectural works, corresp(niding in character with 

 those wliich used at one time to be published in this country, and 

 which up to the present time have continued to be brou;,'ht out 

 upon the continent, are no longer engaged in by us, it is to be at- 

 tributed, some will perhaps say, to their being supplied to us by 

 the continent itself. That such publications as those of Schinkel, 

 Kleuze, Gartner, Famin, Gauthier, Letarouilly, Cicognara, Canina, 

 Cassina, Uiedo, Runge, Gladbach, Tietz, Joly (Chambre des 

 Depute's), Calliat, (Hotel de Ville de Paris), and a great many 

 others, are known here, there can be no doubt. One or two of 

 them are stock-books with English booksellers. Yet, whether 

 they have been imported to such extent as to render all home- 

 production of the same sort quite unnecessary, may very well be 

 doubted. Granting, however, such to be the fact, the conse(|uence 

 is, the continent gets nothing of a similar kind from us in return ; 

 wherefore, foreign architects, who would probably be benefitted by 

 some exchange of ideas with us, are left to suppose that English 

 ones produce nothing worthy of being shown, or that will bear the 

 test of examination when fully exposed by being delineated in all its 

 parts. AVe can \ery well afford, it may be said, to let other 

 countries entertain whatever opinions they please of us, in the 

 matter of architecture and art. Very true ; why, then, are some 

 among us so sore, so picpied, and so touchy, whenever it happens 

 to be intimated that we lag far behind foreigners in regard to 

 architectural publishing, "as any comparison of catalogues will 

 show" — a confession now paraded before the public with the con- 

 sent and under the auspices of several of our leading arcliitects ? 

 If we have acted right of late years in entirely abstaining from 

 producing architectural i)u1)lications that miglit proudly rank with 

 the best foreign ones of the kind, there is nothing at all to be 

 angry or to blush at, whenever as much is stated. Rather ought 

 we to congratulate ourselves upon our superior prudence and 

 discretion. Why should "■ any comparison of catalogues" disturb 

 us, or discompose the serenity of our tempers .'' On the other 

 hand, if it be now considered desirable to show rivalry with the 

 continent, in respect of architectural publications, ivhat is con- 

 templated by the " Architectural Pub!icati(m Society" will go but 

 a very little way indeed towards accomplishing such object. 



VII. It might very naturally be imagined that architecture is 

 pretty generally studied by our higher and middling classes, and 

 that there would accordingly be a considerable and constant de- 

 mand for books relating to it, it being from those classes that 

 those who sit in committee and in judgment upon designs sent in 

 at competitions are selected, or else elect themselves. They are 

 of course all " highly resjjectable" and " honourable" persons, and 

 so forth ; yet that avails nothing, if they ])ossess not at the same 

 time some intelligence of architecture itself, which certainly does 

 not come all at once by intuition, just when there happens to be 

 occasion for exercising it, nor is it to be acquired without con- 

 siderable study and application. Possibly, it may be that those 

 who enter committees of tlie kind are so exceedingly ignorant, 

 as not to be at all aware of the responsibility they take upon 

 themselves, or their own utter unfitness for the office they assume. 

 The consequence is, that although by undertaking it they are dig- 

 nified — at least, fancy themselves to be so — art is damned. Ac- 

 cording to the present precious system of managing such matters, 

 the sending in a carefully-studied design is no better than casting 

 pearls before swine. A production of the kind elicits nothing 

 tetter than a grunt, and the decision is made in favour of swill 

 and Sansovino. Now, if gentlemen like to call f(u- a bottle of 

 genuine old Sansovino, they are welcome to do so ; but it is, as my 

 Lord Liverpool would have said, "really too bad" to cause other 

 people to send in a hundred samples of various sorts, when the 

 said Sansovino alone was wanted. Alas ! for both the nous and the 

 honour of the Army and Navy, — at least. An- those of the Army and 

 Navy Club, who, after taxing in no ordinary degree (owing to the 

 limited space of the first sight) the ingenuity of between sixty and 

 seventy architects, decided in favour of a jirosaic affair vamped-up 

 after Sansovino. That l)usy-body prig, t'ount d'Orsay, deserves 

 to be well ducked in a 'Orse-pond, for leading the Army and Navy 

 — our British Army and Navy, or their Club at least — by the nose. 

 Rather ought the "club" to have been so wielded as to knock his 



Countship down, and send him to grope in the abyss of his cox- 

 ciuubical conceit. However, if English architects like to be 

 kicked by French counts, without attempting to resent it, so be 

 it. They may be both kicked and spit upon for aught that 1 care, 

 if they are too cowardly to protect themselves. 



VIII. In what he says of the Royal Exchange, the writer in the 

 current number of the " Wmtniiiiatcr" makes no objection to 

 that edifice being so greatly disfigured by the shops. It is also 

 somewhat strange, that while he so vehemently coiulemns the 

 excess to which decoration has been carried at the Houses of Par- 

 liament, he is quite silent with regard to what persons less critical 

 will be likely to consider the greatest fault of all — namely, the 

 enormous cost so incurred. Mr. Hume's words, when he said (in 

 1836) he firmly believed that the expense of Mr. Barry's plan 

 would be double the estimate, have already been verified. Mr. 

 Mackinnon went even further, and declared that " Two Millions 

 will not cover the expense." Let us then " firmly believe" that 

 Three Millions will do so. 



ARCHITECTURE AT THE ROYAL ACADEMY. 



[third notice.] 



Owing to the Exhibition's terminating this season somewhat 

 earlier than usual, and to our not knowing that it was about to 

 close until just a daj' m- two before, when we were ])re\ented from 

 re-visiting it, we must now trust to our memory and a ievi slight 

 notes previously taken down by us, for such further account as our 

 readers must now be content with. Of the one hundred and sixty 

 drawings in the Architectural Room, forty-six may \ery well be 

 said to have " no business" there, they being not original architec- 

 tural productions — not designs and compositions by the respective 

 exhibitors, but merely views and other portraitures of different 

 buildings, or bits of buildings. Now, in our opinion, subjects of 

 that kind are at the best somewhat out of place in an architectural 

 exhibition, if only because an annual exhibition is, unless otherwise 

 expressed, expected to show us the performances of contemporary 

 talent. Were the Architectural Room three or ftjur times larger 

 than it is, — or, what would be better still, were there two sufficiently 

 spacious rooms, one of which might be set apart for what is mere 

 architectural portraiture, there would be no objection to productions 

 of the latter description being admitted, provided they were worthy 

 of being so, either on account of intrinsic interest or freshness of 

 subject, or superior ability and charm as regards artistic execution. 

 Unfortunately, the reverse of this is the case : buildings that have 

 become quite hackney and stale (having been shown again and 

 again both in book engravings and drawings, and also in copies 

 from them, till we almost sicken at the bare mention of their names) 

 are allowed to find admission at the Academy, in hundreth-edition 

 representations of them. And not only are such things admitted, 

 while original architectural productions are turned away, but many 

 of them — and perhaps some of the stalest or else most trivial in 

 subject, are allowed to occupy better places than drawings which 

 show us, or rather would show us what we ha^■c not before seen, 

 were they not hung where they cannot be seen themselves. As we 

 have already observed, this is the unhappy case of No. 1095, the 

 new Coffee Room of the Carlton Club-house ; while, as if on purpose 

 to render that case a still more scandalous one several large frames, 

 which contain only very uninteresting views of architectural ruins, 

 are placed very conspicuously nearly upon the "//»(•." Had No. 

 1095 been differently described — had it passed, as it very fairly 

 might have done, under the name of Mr Sydney Smirke, with the 

 information that the encaustic embellishments were by Mr. Sang, 

 it would, we suspect, have been very differently treated. Well, let 

 us hope that it will be admitted again next season, for it certainly 

 canmit be rejected as having been " already publicly exhibited, ' 

 unless being publicly put out of sight is just the same as being 

 " puldicly exhibited." The linnger-s seem to think that they are at 

 libertv to do just as they please in the Architectural Room, and 

 commit all sorts of absurdities there without incurring the slightest 

 censure. They know well enough thatthe architectural drawings are 

 never spoken of by the newspapers press; the hangmen, however, 

 are merely the executioners : they are not responsible for judicial 

 blunders and %vant of judgiuent in the judges themselves, who not 

 content with condemning this year many meritorious architectural 

 performances, by rejecting them, have, by admitting them signified 

 their ajiprobation of a great many others which, whatever some 

 among them may be as drawings, are below mediocrity as designs. 

 If it be the policy of the Academy to bring architecture — that is, 



