'12 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



[Februabt, 



I'rom Hie same centres, and with the diagonal of th« rectangle u radini, 

 describe arcs on the opposite side of the figure, a< at e, e. 



From each of the points a, a, a, a, as centres, describe arcs pasting 

 through the vertises of the isometrical diameters which are on the same 

 fide of the conju^nte axis, but on the opposite side of the transverse one. 

 From the points A, 4, and c, c, as centres, describe arcs in continuation. 



IJEPORT FROM THF, INSTITUTE OF THE FINE ARTS ON 

 PU15L1C COMPETITIO.NS. 



" Gentlemen — Competitions in art are now so frequent and so fully re- 

 Sfionded to that, without sound principles in their management, thi-y must 

 necessarilv be very injurious to the artists, hovvevur advantageous lliey 

 may appear to the' public ; for instance, in the case before us, if l,(IOO(. 

 lias lo be competed for, and lifly artists enter the lists and ?ppnd I,hilOi. of 

 monev and an amount of time equal lo twetiiy-nine yeard of bumdn lite, as 

 tliis iiHiuiry will demonstrate, they evidently luse l.SOOi. and the whole of 

 that lime, unless there is compensation by reputation, by acquired know- 

 Jedu-H which may be turnt-d tn account, or in the sale of lb'' compelilion 

 pictures. If wbidesome condition of public taste, good sense in the ar- 

 rangements, and strict justice in the awards at competitions, would, in 

 some measure, afford this compensation, but tlie usual modes adopted in 

 th<-s» trials of skill afford none ; on the contrary, tliey are attended with 

 many cirronislances that embitter the feelings, aggravate Ibe sufferings, 

 and uikiie the reputation of enthusiastic competitors. Such a course must 

 ultimately be injurious to the public as well as to the artist. 1 he system 

 has indeed mucli of the excitement and immoral tendenc.es of a lottery. 



In (irdir to arrive at a bet'er principle, we have inquired into the results 

 of varirius competitions in dilferent ages, and in several countries ; we have 

 endeavoured to trace the amount of competency in the judges and of equity 

 in the mode of arrangement, or of good faith in the superintending authori- 

 ties. Among tlie aucient Greeks various jilaiis were adopted, according 

 to the mure or less popular political inslitutioua of the commuuity. AVhere 

 the arts flourished most, public opinion, in whatever form expressed, was 

 the basis of public patronage. In some cases the cnnimunity, considering 

 the ciunpeling artists most interested in a fair decision, actually left that 

 decision to them ; in others the opinion of the people was paramount ; but 

 even then suggestions from the artists were attended to with deference and 

 respect, and not disregarded or condemned as is too often done among us. 

 When I'hidias and Alcamenes competed for a statue to be placed on a 

 column or other eleialed siluaticm, at first sight all opinions weie in favour 

 of Alcamenes, but I'hidias demanded that both figures should be placed at 

 the intended elevation, previous to the award being made. This was done, 

 and such was the consideration of perspective effect by the one artist and 

 its netrlect by the other, that the people uo sooner saw them at their re- 

 quiri-d elevaticm, than they changed their opinion, and decided in favour 

 of I'hidias. Id this instance it is clear tliat the judges, i. e. the public, 

 were not fully competent to their task, but it is also obvious that such 

 artists as Alcamenes would have been equally unlit or even worse; for, in 

 all probability, relying on their practice and skill, they would not have 

 taken tlie trouble lo raise the competing statues lo the proposed elevation, 

 and in all likelihood they would have been more tenacious of a first opinion 

 than the people were. 



In the case of the ciiizens of Cos choosing a statue of Venus from two 

 by Praxilelles, so far from delegating their judgment to artists, they se- 

 lecled, from a motue of delicacy, that which the technical connoisseurs 

 denounced as inferior. Posterity has decreed lliat in this, good sense 

 triiimiihed over conventional excellence. 



iMuch has been said of a mode of deciding some competitions among 

 artists III aniit-nt Greece, in which the competitors were each allowed two 

 votes, under the notion that in the ballot, each would give one vole in favour 

 of his own performance, and Ihe other lo the best of his rivals ; as though 

 all the candidates, after imlulging a sellish conceit, would, as soon as that 

 first impulse was gratified, become perfectly candid ; as though the act per- 

 formed by one hand, and its motive, were unknown to ihe other? Unless 

 lliev were strictly lionourHble and impartial, it is more likely that they 

 Wood give both votes to tlieir own work, or the second vote to the most 

 uidikfly rival ; thus might the least talented stand at the head of the poll : 

 \^e have been informed of occurrences which confirm this opinion. On one 

 decision at one of our distinguished instiluliuns, a candidate was elecled 

 to an iinporiant office, for which he was so totally unfit, that the self-de- 

 graded electors had to request their own nominee to resign ; on another, an 

 iiiduidual of considerable reputation, after proposing and making a warm 

 eulogy of a friend's qualifications, was proTeil, by the unanimity of the 

 voles in favour of himself, to have sacrificed that friend to his own conceit. 

 If candidates are honourable and true, one vole is as good as two ; and so 

 il would be if they were all selfish and cunning. 



Karly in the fourteenth century, a very important competition took place 

 at Florence, between Brunelesuhi, Donalcllo, Ghiberli, and four other 

 eminent sculptors; for under good aud honourable regulations, the greatest 

 \\ere not loth to compete. Sulijects, to be executed in bronze, for the 

 ornament of Ihe gates of the Uaptistery of Bt. John, were confided lo their 

 euiulatiou, each b.iog provided, at the public expense, with every con- 



venience of Btadio, furnace, and other accommod.ilion, that could ensure 

 Boccess, and a sura for personal expenses. Having done so much for Ihe 

 comfort of the artists during the period of their exertions, a compi-teut tri- 

 bunal next recei'ed the consideration of the Flureatines ; thirtyfour men 

 of taste and talent, some artists and some amnteurs, were appointed judges 

 to determine which was entitled toespecial admiratiou, and public employ- 

 ment. Their votes were divided, and no .lecisiou obtained froia them ; but 

 the magnaniinuus candour of Bruneleschi and Uonalellu, who had each 

 the same number of votes as Ghiberli, at oni-e settled it in his favour, and 

 proved the tribunal incompetent : those generous rivals saw nu room u> 

 doubt his superiority in that contest ; and posterity has sanctioned iheir 

 opinion. The incompetency of this tribunal was, however, but n-gativrly 

 bad ; it allowed the scales of justice lo remain in doubtful suspension, but 

 il did not actually reverse its tendency, and cloud the prospects and fame 

 of a deserving candidate. A similar diffidence, or modest ignorance, wai 

 remarkabl"! when Leimardo da Vinci, and Jlichael Augelu Ijuonarolti, 

 made their great trial of skill at the Council Chamber; the splendour of 

 the one did uot eclipse the majesty of the otlier,a3 the success of one man's 

 talent invariably smothers the fame of every other in our modern competi- 

 tions. 



In France, during the period of religious animosity, from the reign of 

 Francis the First to that of Louis the Fourteenth, public com|)eliiious were 

 often productive of fine works, as the best portions of the palace of Fon- 

 taiuebleau, aud the beautiful square of ihe Loutre attest. In those in- 

 stances, native talent, both Catholic and Protestant, in worthy emulatiou, 

 stands triumphant amidst the performances of foreign rivalry. The same 

 system was resorted to for the east front of the Louvre, and the award of 

 superior merit was in favour of Claude Perraull, ihe physician aud ma- 

 thematician, but a corrupt court, where the spirit of intellectual freedom 

 had not survived that of anarchy and rebellion, could uot rest satisfied 

 with the result of competition and public opinion. Louis the Fourteenth 

 endeavoured to set aside the design of Perrault, and invited lierniiii, the 

 fashionable Italian architect and sculptor of the day, to vi,it his court aud 

 design something worthy the magnificence and splendour of that pompous 

 monarch. Princely honours attended on the foreign artist in his progress 

 lo the French capital, but Colbert found it advisable to lean towards the 

 popular opinion : the king relented, Iternini retireil with Ihe snme affected 

 magnificence that accompanied his arrival, and the design of Perraull, ihe 

 masterpiece of Ihalera, before which even Whitehall sinks in comparison, 

 was completed, at once a monument to French taste aud a trophy lo public 

 opinion. 



Under Napoleon, competition was far from pure. The jury of artists 

 for the Decennal prizes adjudged the great prize for a subject of ancient 

 history to (Jirodet, for a scene of the Deluge. The emperor was disap- 

 pointed : he had expected that pi'ize to be given lo his first painter, iJavid, 

 for the intercession of the Sabine women between iheir enraged relatives 

 and Iheir Uoman husbands. The judges could not indeed be induced to 

 convict themselves of incompetency in that decision ; but, to conciliate the 

 sovereign, in the next trial, they conferred the prize for a modern subject 

 on Uavul's coronation, and not on the plague of Jaffa, by G.'os, wduh 

 they individually preferred. A sad example of artists, eminent fur talent 

 and character, rendered dishonest by the interference of a potentate. 



At the present lime in France, where artists constitute an infijential 

 portion of the intellectual aristocracy (the aristocracy of talent and prol'es- 

 sions); wdiere authority and intrigue are variously apportioued. uo one 

 ronipetitiou is of much importance, for the elfect of a partial decision by 

 the court parly, is frequently neutralised by an equally unsound award in 

 favour of the injured artist, by some municip dity of opposiliou politics, lu 

 whose prejudices an appeal is made, aud who have in their gilt a provin- 

 cial commission. 



In our own country, competitions are very unsatisfactory, and frequently 

 alike absurd and unjust : in Ihat for the Nelsou memorial, the vacdlaiioo 

 of the committee in setting aside their first hasty award, aud advertising a 

 new contest and exhibition, with their final connrmation of tliat firat very 

 doubtful judgment, coiupromised the dignity of the committee as much a6 

 its taste, ami unnecessarily increased by many thousands of pounds lh« 

 expense (besides trouble) of the artists. That competilion w.is fatal lo the 

 confidence of artists in a tribunal of amateurs of rank and fortune, but that 

 of the Uoyal F.xcbange with a tribunal of artists was still noiie : the jury 

 of three eminent architects, refused any premium to the design which ibey 

 acknowledged lo be the best, under the plea that it could uot be built for 

 the sum stipulated ; nor was ihat decree reversed when contractors of 

 reputation ofi'ered to undertake it under securities ; but they gave the pre- 

 miums to other cainlidates, whose designs they declared lo be quite im- 

 practicable. They were next requested to prepare a design themselves. 

 It is understood, that two of those three judges, after examining aud cuu- 

 demuiiig all the designs, actually consented to do so, but the unseemly 

 proceeding was checkeil by public opinion. The ultimate conipetilion wits 

 between two architects of considerable and ueujiy equal iufiuence among 

 the civic authorities. 



The recent competition exhibitions at Westminster Hall, for the decora- 

 tion of the Parliament Houses, were at first hailed as the beginn ng of a 

 better system, more intellectual and pure ; but up to the preseni lime, the 

 results have led ouly to disappointmenl among the great body of the candi 

 dales, and growing indifference in the public, ^oiue artiets, after being 

 rewarded the first year, had their works treated as unworthy even to be 

 publicly exhibited at the second, Hbilst others bavu beeu appointed for 



