i»4«.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



47 



Before we leave the qnestion of position, we mnsf condemn the prac- 

 tice of sume architects who, having partly received the rnle we are lay- 

 ing duHU, have placed their Sacristies at the western part of the north 

 s.de of tiie chancel, in the angle between the north aisle and ihe chancel. 

 Certain advantages seem to be gained by this alteration : it is particu- 

 larly convenient for a concealed winding staircase to the pulpit ; it avoids 

 «a nivkivard corner on the outside ; it allows of the door being placed so 

 far vvest as not to interfere with the altar space, which is felt to be a gain 

 now, cuusidering that so many lay people resort to the Sacristy. Never- 

 ihejess, independently of the argument from authority, we prefer the old 

 arrangement, by which the |iroxiniity of the Sacristy to the altar is main- 

 tained, the east window of the north aisle is preserved, a better distribu- 

 tion of light iu the chancel is gained, and the stalls on the north side are 

 left free. In a word, we think it will be felt that this arrangement har- 

 monizes more with the disposition and keeping of an old church ; and 

 very often the feeling of a thoughtful observer of our old churches is 

 worth attention, even though he may find it difficult or impossible to 

 describe in words the nature of, or the reasons for, his impression. 



W'e are aware that examples may be found of Sacristies built in the 

 middle, and not at the eastern part, of the north side, as at S. Margaret's, 

 Leicester, where it occupies the middle of the three bays composing the 

 north chancel aisle; or even of Sacristies in the middle bay of the south 

 side, as at All Saints. Maidstone, Kent; but this is the case, perhaps ex- 

 dusively, in Third-Pointed churches, and those of a more dignitied kind 

 than the class we are now considering. The eastern end of the north 

 side will be found, we believe, the usual place in moderate churches of 

 the Middle-Pointed period. 



Another position, sometimes chosen in modern times, is to be severely 

 reprehended. The Sacristy ought not to be eastward of, or behind, the 

 altar, whether it be made by advancing the altar and reredos aud leaving 

 a screened space between it and the east wall, as at Holy Trinity, Cam- 

 bridge, or by building a semicircular apse for it, as at Emmanuel church, 

 Caniberwell. We are aware that some have held that the apsidal Ro- 

 manesque churches in this country were originally so fitted : at S. John, 

 Little Maplestead, Essex, the arrangement remains : we answer, that 

 even were this the case, which we do not believe, both the Romanesque 

 style and the apse itself have passed away, and the Camberwell parody 

 ptrhaps did not deserve mention. 



Having thus settled the right position of the Sacristy, we will mention 

 a few further particulars respecting this part of a church. We believe 

 that generally it ought to have a lean-to roof, to distinguish it from a 

 chantry, which, more often, if not always, has a gable. We are not sure 

 that a separate gable is ever to be recommended, where there is no altar ; 

 for example, in aisles : the picluresqueness of three gables is, we are con- 

 fident, a snare to some of our best modern architects. Still, if the Sa- 

 a'isty runs at right angles to the axis of the church, instead of parallel to 

 it, a gable may be allowed ; but this arrangement is not to be encou- 

 raged. 



The details in the Sacristy may be of a less ecclesiastical character 

 than tliose admitted into the church itself. Authority for this is found to 

 a limited degree in the instances above; the church ofS. M->ry, (Jber- 

 wesel on the Rhine, and S. Leonhard, at Frankfort-on-the-iMainc, are 

 examples in point. It may be questioned whether this licence is to be 

 extended to more dignified churches. We cannot object to a fireplace 

 and a chimney in a Sacristy : let them be boldly and uudisguisedlj treated. 

 Still we are not sure that a too secular style has not been sometimes ad- 

 mitted. 



Keipecting large or town churches, the rules are not so stringent. In 

 theoe the Sacristies may be in any convenient situation ; of course, nearer 

 the altar than otherwise. Thus at S. Mary, RedclilTe, they are on the 

 north side, and have an upper story of rooms fitted for residence ; in the 

 abbey church of S. Mary, Tewkesbury, they are beautifully vaulted apart- 

 ments to the south. In such churches the Sacristy ought to glow with 

 C(Jour and ornaments no less than the more sacred parts of the building. 

 The Sacristies at S. Miuiato, I'lorence, and .Sta. Maria Gloriosa di' Krari, 

 Venice — the first south of the south chancel-aisle, the latter south of the 

 south transept— are remarkable examples. S. Anastasia, Verona, hiis a 

 notwe Sacristy, north of llie north transept. The Duomo, at iMilun. has 

 Sacristies north and south ; an arrangement adopted, not unhappily, in S. 

 Paul's, London. At Cologne they lie to the north ; and the detached 

 .S«cristies at S. Peter's, Rome, lie also to the north of the nortli transept. 

 On the whole the noilh, for dignified churches also, is the better side. 

 The Vestries of the churches in London built after the great fire — which 

 provoke many a sneer from superficial observers for their supposed com- 

 fori — «ire rather to be regarded as instances wherein the architects have 

 mastered the true idea of what they were building ; placing it where 

 most convenient, fitting it for its various ii.ses, (unfortunately not solely 

 reJigious ones,) and making it a not unworthy appendage to their costly 

 churches. It waa neither practical skill, nor boldness, nor animus that 

 was wanting to our then architects. The Paganism of their age spoilt 

 it all. 



And this consideration leads ns naturally to observe the importance 

 of an architect's clearly mastering the idea of what he is going to de- 

 sign before he begins. There is no part of a church which has no) 

 its peculiar use, and ought not therefore to have a peculiar character. 

 One does not see how a northern or southern porch could be otherwise 

 than a gabled building, with its axis at right angles to the church. 



Again, nothing can be more distinct, or peculiarly appropriate to Ua 

 use, than the character of a chapter-house. Similarly, a chantry, or an 

 aisle with eastern altar, would seem to require a gabled roof: a lean-to 

 roof, again, befits the subsidiary use of a Sacristy. The selection, then 

 of the detached chapterhouse form for the Sacristy at a new church at 

 Keswick, and at S. John Baptist's, Eastover, was a great mistake 

 arising from a want of discrimination between the two kinds of build- 

 ing. But a less pardonable confusion of ideas is to be observed in the 

 restoration of S. Martin's, Canterbury, where a nondescript building 

 part aisle, part chantry, is added as a Sacristy, and a cellar for the 

 stove, towards the western part of the north side of the chancel. It is 

 a great mistake also to build parvises for Sacristies. The position is 

 most inconvenient, besides that the parvis had, and might have again 

 an appropriate use. Nor can this use of an ancient parvise be well 

 defended, even where the sacristy has perished. This was the case at 

 Kemerlon, Gloucestershire, and led perhaps to the blocking up of the 

 priest's door in that church. We have seen a modern design in which 

 the chancel is raised and a Sacristy formed like a crypt below it It is 

 conceivable that great peculiarity of site might justify this arrangement- 

 but it is not to be recommended. ° ' 



It will be at once seen that if our observations be true, few devices 

 are more essentially objectionable than one we have often deplored • 

 namely, the use of a building, opening to the church, aisle-wise or 

 chantry-wise, by an arch, and purclosed off fur a Sacristy, the ofan 

 perhaps being pl.iced above. It is altogether a confusion of ideas. ° 



Any secular uses of a vestry are so incompatible with the religious 

 ones, that we cannot conceive any arrangement which shall unobjec- 

 tionably suit the two combined. We have confined ourselves to point- 

 ing out the best course to adopt with reference to the Sacristy consi- 

 dered only in ita higher use. — Ecclesiologist, 



SUSPENSION AQUEDUCT OVER THE ALLEGHENY 

 RIVER, PITTSBURGH. 



This work, recently constructed under the superintendence of John \ 

 Roebling, the designer and contractor, has supplied the place of the, 'hi 

 wooden structure which originally was built by the State of Penusvlva 

 nia at the western termination of the Pennsylvania Canal. 



The Council of the city of Pittsburgh, by whom, iu co'n^eauence r.f j,. 



gross sum of 02,000 dollars, including the removal of t'hTolTuouderou^ 

 structure and the repair of the pier and abutments ; a very ^nall 

 indeed for a work of such magnitude. As this work is the first of u'e 

 kind ever attempted, its construction speaks well for the enterprize of the 

 city of Pittsburgh. ^ ' 



The removal of the old work was commenced in September 1844 aud 

 boats were passed tlirough the new aqueduct in May 1843 ' ' 



two courses crossing each other at right angles, so as to form a solid lat 

 tice-work of great strength and stiflcess, sufficient to bear its own wei„i,t 

 aud to resist the effects of the must violent storms. The b,.ii„n, ..."h 



, I , , , . ''"""ms. The bottom of th, 



trunk rests upon transverse beams, arranged in pairs, four feet aoarl • 

 between these, the posts which support the sides of the trunk are let in 

 Willi dove-tailed tenons, secured by bolts. The outside posts which Mm 

 port the sidewalk and tow-palh, incline outwards, aud are connected w, I.' 

 the beams in a similar manner. Each trunk-post is held by iw„ brace 

 2i X 10 inch, and connected with the outside posts by a double ioisi of 

 25 X 10. The trunk-posts are 7 inches square on top, and 7 x 14 at th • 

 heel ; the transverse beams are 27 feet long, and 16x6 inches • the snare 

 between the two fiamii.gs is 4 inches. It will be obseried that all nans , f 

 the framing are double, with the exception of the posts, so a. to admit 

 the suspension rods. Each pair of beams is supported on each s.Je „f 

 the trunk by a double suspension rod of l|th inch round iron beut'iu the 

 shape of a stirrup, and mounted on a small cast-iron saddle, which rests 

 on the cable. These saddles are connected, on top of the cables bv link ■ 

 which diminish in size from the pier towards the centre. The side ''f 

 the trunk set solid against the bodies of masonry, which" are erected" tV 

 each pier and abutment as bases for the pyramids which support the 

 cables. These pyramids, which are constructed of 3 blocks of a durable 

 coarse, hard-grained sandstone, rise 5 feet above the level of the sid ' 



walk and tow-path, and measure 3X5 feel on top, and 4x0' feet at 

 base. The side-walk aud tow-path being 7 feet wide, leave 3 feetsnait 

 fur the passage of tlie pyramids. The ample width of the tow and foot 

 path IS therefore contracted on every pier, but this arrangement proves ni 

 inconvenience, aud was necessary fur the suspension of the cable* „^,. 

 :o the trunk. "' 



