308 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT.S JOURNAL. 



[September. 



it would not aft'oct tile apparent maRnltude of adjacent buildings, it must fi^ 

 removed to the middle of Hyde Park or Regent's Park, where it would h'' 

 entirely thrown away. I would not, out of regard for the surrounding build- 

 ings, be afraid of the height of this monument : to give it all the effect of 

 which it is capable, should be, I think, the paramount object ; and witli that 

 view, instead of dropping it down to a ground line sunk below the level of 

 the terrace, I would lift it uj) on to a terrace levelled out from the portico of 

 tlie Gallery ; ami, may I venture to add. I would have selected a design for 

 this ninnument that could be prudently built without the serious curtailment 

 of its dimensions which has been found necessary. 



Sir It. Westmnrrtlt. — As a site for the column itself, or indeed for any 

 nioniiment, ("without reference to objects now erected.) the po-ition referred 

 to is most favouraljle. 



C, R. Cockerel!, Esq.B..A. — In answer lo the first and second luestions of your 

 Honourable Committee, on the proposed column in Trafalgar Square, I beg 

 leave to oiler as my opinion, that such a column, on a pedestal 4.3 feet liigh, 

 the whole being 170 feet high, will have no ill effect on the National Gallery 

 and the surrounding buildings, on the score ot its scale and dimensions, 

 viewed from the north, west, and east sides of the square, because I believe 

 that the juxtaposition of colossal and ordinary proportions has been prac- 

 tised in all times and in all styles of architecture with success, especially by 

 the ancients, who observed this principle more strictly than the moderns'; 

 vitness the column of Trajan, in an area 82 feet by 62 feet ; that of Anto- 

 nine, in a square not much larger; the ivory and gold colossal statues of 

 Jupiter and of Minerva, which occupied the entire nave of their temples. 

 Again, the Tower of St. Mark, at Venice. 42 feet wide at the base, and 316 

 feet high, in a square 5li2 by 1:32 ; the Column of London, and that of the 

 Duke of York ; none of which can be said to deteriorate from the architecture 

 in connexion with which they are seen. The placing such colossal objects in 

 extensive areas, as in the front or St. Peter's at Rome, Place Louis XV., at 

 Paris, at St. Petersburgh, and other places, is wholly a modern practice, and 

 a rleparture from the principle of eftect on w hich they were originally founded 

 l)y the ancients. My conclusion therefore is, not that the proposed column 

 is too large for the site, but that the site is too large for the full efieet of the 

 proposed column. 



With reference to the third question of your Honourable Committee, I beg 

 leave to suggest that the principle in question appears to apply to colossal 

 objects seen rather from a near point of view than from a distant one ; be- 

 cause, in the first case, their position with respect to the objects beyond is 

 altered with every step of the spectator, and the contrast and combination of 

 their ever varying forms with those in the back ground may be advantageous 

 to both ; but in tlie latter case, where the gross disproportion is viewed 

 almost geometrically, is unrelieved by detail or change of fonn. and fixed, 

 during an approach from some distance in a straight line, the interposition of 

 such an object actually exceeding the height of the entire building, and 

 growing larger in the advance towards it, must divide and disunite the whole 

 composition of the back ground, and obstruct the view of the central feature 

 by its bulk, to its "^-eat disadvantage. 



I believe it will be found the constant practice of the best architects to 

 consider the central object in front of a great building, as a scale for the 

 appreciation of its magnitude, and to make it always subordinate to the 

 uninterrupted view of its principal feature. Thus the statue of Queen Anne, 

 before St. Paul's, presents an admirable centre and scale to the whole front, 

 ivithout in any degree obstructing its view. The statue of King Charles 

 Tilays the same part, with reference to the National Gallery, from M'hitehall 

 Place, and the contrast is greatly to its advantage in approaching from Par- 

 liament .-'treet. The proposed column would supersede that well-proportioned 

 centre, and present a succession of centres, contrary to the usual architec- 

 tural practice, which places successive objects at the sides, but never in the 

 cenUe of an avenue, especiallj- when such centres would obstruct the view 

 cf a fine object in the back ground. 



In answering the fourth question of y( ur Honourable Committee, I am con- 

 strained, for the above reasons, to offer my liumble opinion, that the pro- 

 posed position for the column is not favourable to it with reference to the 

 whole square, nor to the National Gallery as seen from Whitehall. And in 

 cliffering. with very great regret, from the able architect who has suggested 

 this position, and the distinguished Committee who have sanctioned it, I feel 

 myself in candour bound, w ith your pennission, to oftijr some further expla- 

 nation, both in fulfilment of my'duty towards ynur Honourable Committee, 

 and the great public object you have in view, and in deference to those gen- 

 tlemen, since my judgment may have been biased by a preconceived view of 

 the subject, which may apologise for the objection wiiich I have ventured to 

 express in reply to the questions of your Honourable Committee. 



1 w as not able to offer the result of my reflections on this great national 

 intention in the general competition, but deeming the square too large to 

 admit of a central column with that effect which the ancients attained, 1 had 

 always conceived that the proposed memorial of a naval commander should 

 cecupy one side of the square, leaving the other for a future and at least 

 equally interesting record of a military commander. 



T«o Biidi columns, placed ai, the dislauce of 70 or SO feet from the south 

 angles of the square would connect its somewhat straggling proportions, 

 present an admirable picture in emerging from Charing Cross, and leave the 

 Gallery open ; they would group admirably in the vicw^ from the .Strand to 

 Cockspur Street, they would conceal the defect of the irclincd roads, accord- 

 ing to the long projected terraces now forming, and their coloss.al proportions 

 would gain gi-eatly by their juxtaposition to the buildings. By such an 

 arrangement the whole area would be left open for all those monuments 

 which in process of time will, we hope, increase upon us. reproducing that 

 altis, or torum, in which the gratitude of the country may be e.xpressed inall 

 the variety of design suited to the situation. 



It will he remembered, that the enthusiasm of the country placed the re- 

 mains of the immortal Nelson in the centre of St. Paul's, as if no future hero 

 could deserve such a position, and perhaps a much greater than Nelson will 

 have to be recorded by us; if, therefore, the centre of Trafalgar Square is 

 now to le occupied, it is certain that no other equally large monument can 



be erected there, and yet it would be difficult to find elsewhere, in the metro- 

 polls, a site equally eligible for such a memorial. 



I trust these observations iu explanation of mv view of the whole subject, 

 may not be deemed obtrusive by your Honourable Committee. 



jolni Deering. Esq. — I think the proposed Nelson Monument presents that 

 precise character ot altitude most to be desired at the particular site intended, 

 whore a great and wide street of entrance necessarily branches oft right and 

 left into a principal artery of the metropolis, and w'here the idea of termi- 

 nation is the impression most essential to be avoided : for we must recollect 

 that the object is not to arrive at Trafalgar Square or the National Gallery, 

 it is to convey to the mind of the stranger the true and peculiar character of 

 our capital, its endless continuation. 



If this view l)e correct, the worst object would be a plain unbroken mass, 

 which like the County Fire Office to its site (grasped by the eye at once), 

 conveys the idea of obstniction. and limits consideration to its own preten- 

 sions alone, as the sole object of the whole arrangement. The broken line of 

 architecture in the National Gallery obliges the eye to travel along its length, 

 but the proposed form completely gets over the difficulty, presenting a mag- 

 nificent object in the vista of approach, while it leaves the idea of space 

 beyond, and suggests the idea of divergence, without obstruction, w here that 

 idea is most essential. 



I cannot suppose the effect would be unfavourable upon the National Gal- 

 lery, for although that building could be no longer seen in its whole extent 

 from any point more distant than the column. I doubt whether its broken 

 character of outline and laboured details, as well as snnllness of parts, do 

 not require that it should not be seen, as a whole, beyond the distance whence 

 those features could be visible at the same time, and so form as it were a 

 p.art of the design ; but on the whole. I think it equally certain that, in its 

 magnitude, this monument, in reducing to comparative insignificance, not 

 only the Gallery, but St. Martin's Churcli. fits pedestal beng nearly as large 

 as the portico, "and the whole nearly as high as the spire of that 'building.) 

 will not also be a monument equally unfavourable to the memory of those 

 who spoilt the National Gallery inside and outside for the assumed sake of a 

 building, of which the unimportance will be thus placed in its true light. 



But notwithstanding, we must not forget that the great end should be to 

 adorn the metropolis, and not to persuade the unwilling of the architectural 

 beauty of Trafalgar-square, or any particular building around its circuit. 



General Ohserrations by T. L. Donaldson, Esq. — The opinions I have given 

 are strictly confined to the questions put in reference to the column, and I 

 therefore do not offer any judgment as to whether any other arrangement of 

 Trafalgar-square would be more advantageous. As the Nelson column must 

 necessarily, from its size, be the most important feature in the area, it is 

 essential that it should form a central object, as it were, to w-liich all the rest 

 must be subordinate and merely contribute. .Size alone will not be sufficient. 

 It is to be hoped that its decorative embellishments should be of a character 

 consistent therewith : a denuded mass of masonry, however gigantic, will have 

 a mean effect, and bear a parsimonious character disgraceiid to the nation 

 The examples of tlie ancients and that of the moderns prove, that the eiu-ich-' 

 ments of sculpture, and a due decoration in the subordinate parts are essentia 1 

 to convey all those impressions which it is necessary to produce when erecting 

 a monument to the honour of one of the greatest men of a great country. It 

 is to be hoped that the erection of the Nelson column may not become an in- 

 stance of miserable national parsimony on such a noble occasion. 



Appendix. 

 EsTiitATE OF Peoposed Works, Tr.a.falfaii-sqi:.\ee. 



19.214 cubic yards of digging and carting away . at 3.5. 

 34.5 cubic yards of concrete .... at 6j. lOJ. 



71 rods reduced brickwork 12/. Ifts. 



630 feet run, 12 iu. gun-barrel drain . . . at 2s. 3rf. 

 9,370 cubic feet of Aberdeen gTanite, w ith a fine axed face. 



joints and beds included . , . . .at 6s. 



372 feet superficial extra sunk work . . .at Is. lid. 

 200 ditto . ditto circular ditto . . .at 2*-. 

 1.016 ditto . ditto moulding to ditto . . at 4,s. 

 74 ditto . ditto circular ditto . . at 5s. 6d. 



180 ditto . ditto rock face . . .at Is. Gd. 

 2,615 cubic feet of Aberdeen granite steps . . at 7s. 

 Bosting and carving 16 blocks in four principal 



pedestals at 4/. 



98 Aberdeen granite posts complete, including fi.xing at 6/. 10s. 

 8 pedestals in balustrade of Aberdeen granite, comp. at 4/. 

 213 Aberdeen granile balusters • . . . at 40s. 

 6.062 cubic feet Irish or other gi-anite, with a fine 



axed face, beds and joints included . . at 5s. 6rf. 



4S7 vards superficial Roman cement . . at 2s. 3d. 



2 sink stones ........ alI40s. 



Cast-iron work to cable bars ... ... 



Coinmission. Clerk of Works and Contingencies 



Total £. 



.hne 1, 1840. 



(Signeil) 



C. B.^KBV. 



Danish Railwai/.— It is not generallv known that a railway from Altona, 

 two miles from Hamburgh to Kiel, in the Duchy of Holstem, has been pro- 

 jected, and is about to be constructed, under the auspices of the King of Den- 

 mark, with a view of effecting a communication between the Norlh Sea and 

 the l!altic. Mr. George Watson Buck, [engineer-in-chief to the Manchester 

 and Birmingham Railway Company has been selected as the engineer to the 

 undertaking. 



