1843.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



317 



As for timber ami plaster buildings, I Jo not think there is much proba- 

 bility of their becoming general, though instances do now and then occur of 

 houses, not indeed of timber, but of brick, painted to imitate the old style of 

 timber house. This is actually worse than imitating stone in plaster, be- 

 cause it is disguising a good and honest material in the garb of one decidedly 

 inferior. Must we then give up for ever all imitation of those beautiful and 

 picturesque examples of this style, once so ornamental to our ancient 

 cities':' \V"e must : no circumstances can now arise, which can give any oc- 

 casion, or call, for such a mode of construction. Ancient remains are, no 

 doubt, very picturesque and beautiful, and their beauty is of a kind too 

 which cannot be transferred to any other material. But the old builders did 

 not employ wood in the construction of their houses, for the sake of the 

 beauty or effect they could thereby impart to them; the timber was em- 

 ployed for convenience and economy, and its accompanying beauties were 

 superadded, and were the result of the taste and feeling of the builders. 

 And as we must discard the use of wood for such purposes, we must also be 

 content to forego its accompanying and characteristic beauties, and employ 

 our taste and ingenuity and love for the beautiful, as they did, on the mate- 

 rials best adapted, by convenience and economy, for our wants. 



The legitimate use of timber in construction forms the next subject for 

 consideration. The nature of this material points so obviously to its proper 

 application, that it would be difficult to go very far wrong. But 1 must take 

 this opportunity of noticing the universal practice of concealing it from view. 

 What reason can there be for thus hiding a most essential part of our archi- 

 tecture':' It is only another result of the blind admiration of the classical 

 styles which has now prevailed so long. What I complain of is the use of 

 plaster ceilings to conceal the construction of doors and roofs. "What," 

 says a writer, in the British Critic, " is the theoretical notion of a flat plaster 

 ceiling''" What portion of the construction does it represent? It more 

 nearly resembles " a vast marble slab" than anything else substantial. This 

 absence of reality gives to a room an appearance and effect of incomplete- 

 ness, and consequently of discomfort. In spite of habit, I am frequently 

 tempted, when looking up at a flat plaster ceiling, to ask myself whether it 

 is really safe, for it seems to be suspended in mid air above one's head with 

 nothing apparent to sustain it, and this effect is nut improved, though the 

 monotony may be relieved, by panelling, coving, or any other device. Now, 

 oi all the portions of an apartment, the covering ought from its position, to 

 have an effect of security, and that effect should be at a glance apparent ; 

 we should not have time to ask the question, before being satisfied on this point. 

 Though people ill general see nothing amiss with a flat clean white ceiling, 

 this arises altogether from habit, and I am persuaded that were a person to 

 accustom himself to compare ceilings as they are, with what they might be 

 made, if the timbers above were shown and appropriately carved and deco- 

 rated, he in uld very soon think as I do, Ceilings in churches are now hap- 

 pily going out of favour; but as to dwelling houses, I see no prospect of 

 even a commencement of reform in this respect ; and I dare say the very 

 idea of exposing the floor joists to view will be absolutely ridiculed by many ; 

 nevertheless, 1 am quite satisfied that were we once to get over the novelty, 

 the change would add greatly to the appearance of security and complete- 

 ness in our apartments. I might add more on this head, but shall reserve 

 further remarks to a future opportunity. I merely mention the practice now 

 as an example of the violation of the fundamental rule, that the construction 

 of a building should not be concealed from view. 



In tieating of construction, I cannot omit saying a few words regarding 

 the use of cast iron, which at the present day is so very extensively used in 

 building. Had we gone on right principles, this material would very likely 

 have modified considerably the character of our architecture, (for, in all an- 

 cient and independent styles, the nature of the materials employed has mo- 

 dified their character more than any other cause ;) instead of which we keep 

 on in the same track of columns, pilasters, architraves, &c, attempting to 

 emulate and imitate the style of a distant age and country, with totally dif- 

 ferent wants and climate ; while with a false shame we attempt to conceal 

 our o«n real constructive resources ; from which, under proper direction, we 

 might rear a national style, in accordance with our national character and 

 civilization. At the same time, I confess that the question, how far and in 

 what manner cast iron may consistently be used in constructive architecture, 

 is not easily solved. But we may safely lay it do'.ui as a rule, that its use 



must be in accordance with our fundamental rule of fitness and propriety 

 and therefore that it cannot properly be used where, if it is seen at all, it 

 cannot assume the character and appearance belonging to the materia] itself. 

 We frequently see portions of stone buildings which are must exposed to in- 

 jury from being chipped and broken, as base courses, plinths, balustrades, 

 &c, » constructed of iron, and painted to resemble stone ; under the false 

 notion that the beauty of the parts will remain with, and depend upon, the 

 sharpness of their preservation. Now, even supposing that the beauty of 

 stone work did depend (which I by no means grant) on its perfect preserva- 

 tion, I contend that such contrivances are bad in principle, are never satis- 

 factory even when quite new ; and in a very short time the parts become so 

 rubbed and polished, as to lose what little character of stone they at first 

 possessed ; and their very sharpness becomes a defect. I would far rather 

 see genuine honest stone, even if it were a little chipped: indeed, I do not 

 think a little damage of this sort here and there, in exposed situations where 

 it is only to be expected, at all detracts from the beauty of stone work where 

 there is any. To come at once to the point — I believe that for ordinary 

 building purposes, in the styles usually adopted in this country, iron cannot 

 be considered a proper material. We may perhaps, at some future time, have 

 ingenuity enough to give it an appropriate and characteristic appearance, 

 and then it may be properly brought into general use. 



It must, however, be understood, that the above remarks do not apply to 

 iron w lien used in fire-proof buildings. Here a new element is introduced, 

 and the style and material have to be modified accordingly. Now, as in this 

 class of buildings wood cannot be introduced, iron comes to our aid most op- 

 portunely, and may be used without reserve as a substitute for wood. It may 

 indeed be considered a most valuable anil indispensable material for such 

 purposes. It should, however, in all cases assume a characteristic form. 

 With the above important exception, the chief value of iron is in engineering 

 and machinery, not in architecture. 



We come now to the consideration of character, including form and en- 

 richment. One of the chief causes of all the bad architecture of the present 

 day, is a want of propriety and consistency between the outside and the in- 

 side of a building. The proper method of designing, and that which was 

 followed by the architects of the middle ages, is, first to get a good and con- 

 venient plan, and on that to raise an exterior possessing the appropriate 

 qualities of beauty or grandeur, most consistent with its purpose. Our 

 system is, I might say almost universally, the direct contrary to this ; wc 

 either design the exterior first, and adapt the plan to that, or we arrange the 

 plan or interior with reference to some imagined exterior; and in either case 

 we very often spo ; l both inside and out. We put up with inconvenience in 

 the plan, for the sake of effect in the elevations; and we so study and con- 

 strain the latter, that, whether in a symmetrical style or not, they seldom 

 possess the expected beauty or charm, even if they possess any beauty at all. 



This is one of the evil consequences of copying the style of a distant age 

 and country, and disregarding our own peculiar climate and manners, and 

 the architecture which arose out of them. Our climate requires high-pitched 

 roofs to throw off' the water; we must have chimneys for the escape of 

 smoke, numerous and spacious windows, variety in the parts and purposes of 

 our buildings; all which are utterly at variance with the classical styles. 

 On the other hand, we have no occasion for columns, entablatures, open por- 

 ticos, and colonnades, which are absolutely necessary to the classical styles. 

 Our requirements and wants are all internal ; Grecian architecture is all ex- 

 ternal. Hence it follows, that classical architecture is not fitted for this 

 country ; and our Surprise at its being so persisted in is the greater, from 

 the numberless examples still remaining, of a style actually the birth and 

 produce of our own soil. What can be more absurd, than building private 

 mansions after the manner of Koman palaces, and Christian churches in the 

 likeness of Creek temples. Some indeed seem to consider that we have at 

 length had enough of such imitations, and to think that, for the sake of 



1 The whole surface of the ground floor of a pile of warehouses I have 

 lately noticed to be faced with iron plates. If, in the construction of these 

 warehouses, convenience, and convenience only, had been consulted, instead 

 of gr.,ndcur of style, we should have had, instead o; a mock imitation of a 

 palace, a plain, honest, substantial, brick and stone warehouse, suited to its 

 purpose, and telling its own talc. The doors and windows would have been 

 in effect widened, by splaying their jambs, instead of being constructs I anil 

 made perfectly square for the sake of effect i the sharp angle involving the 

 supposed necessity of using a false material. 



43* 



