1843.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECTS JOURNAL. 



:iif» 



which a bluish green predominates. Then the doors and window shutters 

 are coloured dark green, to imitate bronze — a violent contrast to the walls — 

 and made the more positive by the deep crimsoned draperies of the curtains. 

 The ceiling is richly coloured and gilt, whilst the walls are comparatively 

 plain. The character of both ought surely to he more consonant — or, if 

 there were any difference, ought not the more attractive features to be on 

 the walls, where they are most easily seen ? Look from the ceiling to the 

 carpet, and in the latter there is the same absence of concordance and pro- 

 priety It has no leading key-note of colour — so to speak — hut is a sort of 

 helter-skelter of many colours. These rooms cannot be said to have any 

 general etfect, or any one strong point to which all others are subordinate. 

 There is nothing positive — nothing consistent — one part is warm, another 

 cold. Richness in the ceilings, poverty on the walls ;— deep-toned colours 

 brought into violent contrasts with others of a very low tone. As for har- 

 mony and due subordination of parts one with another, they cannot he met 

 with. The whole gives an impression as if it bad been the work of a com- 

 mittee, where there had been a compromise to suit every one's taste, and 

 each member bad undertaken the independent arrangement of different 

 parts — one superintending the floor, another the ceiling, a third the walls, a 

 fourth the doors and shutters, a fifth the draperies, and so on. Having 

 looked at the rooms thus generally, we proceed to glance at some of the de- 

 tails, which, in their want of principle, deserve severer criticism. 



The ornaments are inconsistent with each other. Some are early Grecian, 

 some l'ompeian, some of the age of Louis Quatorze ! as in the cornices of 

 the window curtains. There is no objection perhaps to a combination of 

 different styles — but it can only be realized successfully by a principle which, 

 depriving each of its distinctive and independent character, succeeds in 

 making all integral and harmonious parts of a novel creation. In architec- 

 tural forms Palladio and Wren succeeded in accomplishing this, when they 

 took those of ancient Rome and adapted them to the buildings of modern 

 Europe. But the decorations at the Travellers' Club are very wide of the 

 application of such a principle. Each different part — said cornices espe- 

 cially — looks like an independent impertinence, and to have been brought 

 together by chance or caprice. It has been noticed that the doors and 

 window-shutters arc painted in imitation of bronze, of a dark-bluish bottle- 

 green hue. The same question suggests itself here as below in the granite 

 corridor. What want could there be even for real bronze under such cir- 

 cumstances ? The doors are subjected to no violences ; not even exposed to 

 corrosion in the open air. At best, they are unsightly mockeries. On the 

 panels of the doors are painted imitations of bas-relief metal work. Imita- 

 tions are tolerable in proportion to their successful approximation to realities. 

 When it was decided so to ornament these panels, the use of real metal, 

 iron, if bronze was too costly, would not have been an impossibility : 

 A few shillings' worth of Mr. Bielefeld's papier mache ornaments would at 

 least have given an actually raised surface, and insured natural shadows 

 whenever the door was opened. Now under fixed painted shadows, every 

 time the door is opened a positive untruth is told in the face of the light. 

 What can be said of the drawing-room carpet ? — a thing in which the cost 

 of pattern is hardly a consideration : certainly not to such a club as this. 

 It is just the carpet you would chance to find adorning the drawing-room of 

 a flourishing cheesemonger in Aldgate or the Minories : flowers of every hue 

 displayed in shaded golden scrolls. It belongs to no recognized style, an- 

 cient or modern ; even that lowest of styles, the Louis Quatorze, would not 

 own it. Is it not a mistake to attempt any imitations which cannot succeed ? 

 If we want the representations of flowers, let them be executed by means 

 which insure something like a correct representation. Employ colours and 

 brushes in the production of pictures of them if you will, but surely not 

 worsted threads. The Greeks took the beautiful forms of nature and used 

 them not as affectations to recall feebly the remembrance of the originals, 

 but adapted them in new methods to new purposes — which suggested new 

 views of their intrinsic beauty. Even the artists of the middle ages exer- 

 cised a better taste than ourselves. A bunch of flowers or group of animals 

 worked in worsted, with its angular shapes affecting to imitate the flowing 

 lines of nature's original, with its crude colouring and hard-marked blotches 

 meant for brilliant hues and soft graduated shadows, merely reminds you 

 how signally it is unlike what it has copied. How different is the effect 

 produced by the pattern of the Grecian honeysuckle or the acanthus leaf on 

 the Corinthian capital ! We look on both as works intrinsically beautiful in 

 themselves, as new creations and not as imitations. The Arabs have taught 

 us how we may have a beautiful arrangement of colours almost independent 

 of pattern. But we do not now intend to write an essay on carpets ; and 

 we can only dispatch that of the Travellers' drawing-room by saying that it 

 has both pattern and abundance of colours — but combined on such false 

 principles that the meanest of Grecian ornaments or Arab combinations of 

 colours rise very far above it. 



We have thought it worth while to enter somewhat at length into this 

 matter, because the members of the Travellers' Club belong to a class who 

 will probably exercise some influence in those decorations of our national 

 buildings which seem to be likely to be realized at no distant day. Should 

 the parties who are responsible for the taste of the decorations in this club, 

 have any voice in directing those of the Palace of Westminster, we hope 

 our remarks may induce them to reflect that there are principles in such 

 matters, which cannot be neglected. If it be true that some thousands of 

 pounds have been spent on these works, we do not scruple to say that a 

 more satisfactory result might have been produced at a much less cost, had 

 a more correct knowledge of the principles of decoration been applied. 



ON SIMPLICITY OP COMPOSITION, ESPECIALLY IN CHURCHES 

 OF THE EARLY-ENGLISH STYLE. 



(From the Ecclesio/or/isl.J 



One very striking difference between ancient and modern compositions 

 in this style is the characteristic ambition of the latter to attain effect, by 

 the introduction of a great deal of showy detail, in positions where it is 

 neither required by use, nor sanctioned by the principles of true architectural 

 propriety, so far as the general practice of antiquity lie admitted as the test 

 of correctness in these points. We do not mean that superabundant orna- 

 ment, properly so called, is the common fault of modem churches, but (hat 

 genuineness is too often sacrificed for show, and that shallow and poverty- 

 stricken designs are meretriciously tricked out as if for the mere purpose of 

 deception, with inappropriate because unnecessary embellishment, while the 

 really essential elements of strength, utility, and reality, which alone consti- 

 tute true beauty, are either unaccountably overlooked, or knowingly ne- 

 glected as matters of secondary importance. For instance, how frequently 

 do we see a thin shell, though internally destitute of piers and arches (fea- 

 tures absolutely essential in churches of a certain size), disguised and set off 

 by a ridiculous display of pinnacles, turrets, ornamental parapets, and 

 crocketed canopies, where not one of these would have been thought of by 

 an ancient architect in building a church of the same size and with the same 

 means. He would have disdained to give affected elegance to his bold and 

 low massive walls, his stately roof, and his fearless irregularity of buttress, 

 windows, and gable : much less woidd he have used cast iron props for piers, 

 that he might have more money to spend in making a fine street elevation. 



The fact is that a certain amount of external decoration, or rather showi- 

 ness, is erroneously considered requisite for the correctness of a church, 

 merely because it is necessary to ensure a competition design being chosen. 

 Now it is very important to observe how completely the ancients were influ- 

 enced by the contrary principle. There is an honesty in their designs which 

 is very striking, if we contrast it with the spurious architectural pretension 

 of many modern churches ; and we speak more especially with reference to 

 those generally erected three or four years ago, though specimens of this 

 sort are unfortunately common enough at the present day. They never made 

 their walls a foot thinner, or their buttresses a foot shallower, or their roofs 

 lower and less substantial, than they ought to be, that they might expend a 

 larger sum upon a fine doorway, or a superfluous arcade, or a richly decorated 

 front. With them all was real, genuine, and natural. No one part was ex- 

 travagantly adorned to the disparagement of the rest ; if one feature was 

 costly, all was in accordance, and not one half starved that the other might 

 be pampered. In a word, nothing was attempted that could not be well and 

 consistently carried out. 



Again, as to the kind of ornament now generally used, much grave objec- 

 tion is to be raised. There is, so to speak, a certain quantity of generally 

 recognised Early-English detail, culled from every possible source, the mighty 

 cathedral, the costly abbey, the larger parochial churches, as well as from 

 books, foreign and English, and the traditional kinds of ornament used, per- 

 haps with no authority at all, by modern builders, all of which is thrown 

 into a common stock, to be freely and indiscriminately applied to any build- 

 ing, without regard to ifs size, character, situation, or conditions of structure. 

 A few points w"e will proceed to specify, in which, according to the extent of 

 our own observation, modern designs are not consistent with ancient models. 



1. We scarcely ever see a modern early-English church, however small its 

 size and otherwise humble its pretensions, without showy octagonal pinna- 

 cles, having heavy cappings and angular shafts around the stem. This fea- 

 ture would almost seem to be considered an absolutely necessary character- 

 istic of a church of this style, and accordingly it is repeated over and over 

 again till the eye is quite wearied of it. Yet who ever saw the like in a 

 real early-English church of the same size ? These are essentially cathedral 

 features, and even there are scarcely found, unless of actual use in balancing 

 a vault. 



2. Flying buttresses, and buttresses in general, are, we think, greatly mis- 

 applied. We scarcely ever see a modern early English buttress without pedi- 

 mental head and set-oft', though these are in fact comparatively rare in ordi- 

 nary churches of the thirteenth century. A cathedral or a great monastic 

 church will have, of course, much rich and costly adornment in every part; 

 it will have, therefore, elaborate buttresses with lofty triangular heads rising 

 above the parapet for the spriuging of the flying buttresses which span the 

 ailes and support the clerestory; but where are these found in smaller 

 churches ? Here we seldom observe any but bold and plain supports, for 

 use and not for show, and therefore placed exactly where and as they are 

 wanted, and not at all unless they are really wanted, without the least affec- 

 tation of ornament or regularity, in short without a particle of trickery 

 about them. Examine, for instance, the plain specimens at Barnwell, 

 Cberry-Hinton, or Histon, and imagine what the effect would be were they 

 exchanged for the trim and chamfered, but meagre and regular, buttresses 

 of the modern architect. 



3. Gable ornaments. We really have seen very few modern designs 

 without every gable being pierced with a vesica piscis, a foliated triangle, a 

 circle, or some fantastic little window. Architects, until the last year or 

 two, so seldom thought of a good high-pitched roof, that they now seem 

 frightened at their own gables, and very often greatly injure their ett'ict by 

 inserting these unnecessary and not always even appropriate ornaments. We 



