1S4I.J 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL 



231 



the river, which have the effect of preventing the rapid discharge of 

 the backwater during the proper tidal duration of the ebb.'' 



Again, " seeing tliat tlie existence of bars is to be attributed to the 

 too great declivity of the bed of the river, or to that of its low water 

 surface, the impropriety of forming dams across a tidal river, with the 

 view of converting it iiito a line of navigation by the means of locks, 

 ouMit to strike every reflecting mind as a measure whicli should never 

 belidopted when there exists any possibility of obtaining the requisite 

 depth of water by deepening the bed of the river." 



In lieu of giving the above, you have merely quoted as my means 

 of improvement, a case or exception, in which 1 have supposed the 

 existence of impediments to carrying the preceding views into execu- 

 tion, such as the great expense of lowering a long lengtli of rocky bed, 

 ■which expense the trade of the port might not be able to bear. 



Considering the error into which you have been misled, by forming 

 your opinion upon the excepted case, in lieu of the general rule which 

 i have advanced, I am not surprised that your views of the utility of 

 my theory do not coincide with the favourable opinions it has elicited 

 from other scientific quarters. 



In my account of the former theories on the cause of the formation 

 of bars, I have given the names of every author who to my knowledge 

 has advanced upon the subject any thing beyond the opinions generally 

 held. I did not give the name of the author of the fourth theory, be- 

 cause my quotation is only from a paper signed Nauticus, in the Nau- 

 tical Magazine for 1S37, page 4S7 ; a work much used for the diffusion 

 of information connected with hydraulic engineering. 



I perceive in your May number that Mr. Henry Barrett avows him- 

 self the author of the paper signed Nauticus. 



Mr. Barrett also takes credit to himself as the originator of the 

 suggestion of the "formation of harbours with double entrances," a 

 principle which he says, "is now recommended by the commissioners 

 in their report of a survey of the harbours on the south east coast." 

 But there is no piracy of Mr. Barrett's conceptions in this, inasmuch 

 as harbours with double entrances have been in existence for many 

 centuries ; neither is there any resemblance between the Loml Jide 

 harbours of refuge proposed by the Government Conunissioners to be 

 constructed in five fathoms at low water, upon the principle of the 

 Plymouth or Cherbourg breakwaters, and the harbours proposed by 

 Mr. Barrett to be constructed at Dungeness, or Lowestoffe Ness ; the 

 latter being mere inland excavations, with channels of approach to 

 them to be cut through the drifting shingle beach ; but which channels 

 and excavations are to remain for ever afterwards clear of deposit ac- 

 cording to the theory of their projector Mr. Barrett. In ray humble 

 opinion they would speedily fill up again and become terra firma, not- 

 withstanding the double entrances. Any scientific or practical man on 

 examining Mr. Barrett's plans for harbours, will immediately perceive 

 the error which has been made in believing that there would be any 

 current through the harbour, as this could only take place if the course 

 from one entrance to the other, through the harbour, were shorter than 

 by the coast line. 



In the Nautical Magazine for 1838, page 97, is a full description of 

 Mr. Barrett's harbours of refuge, and a reply to his theories on bars. 

 "Lowestoffe Ness is a flat point of sand and shingle, which has been 

 slowly but continually increasing and extending further into the sea; 

 towards the centre of this Ness it is proposed to excavate a basin of 

 some three acres, and it is intended to open a channel north and south 

 into the sea on either side of the Ness. These entrances being pro- 

 tected with short piers, and once opened to a depth of fifteen feet at 

 low water, (no very easy job,) are thenceforth, and for ever after, so 

 to remain at the simple ipse dixit of the engineer. I doubt it ; I will 

 ask any unprejudiced person acquainted with this part of the coast, 

 the flow of tide, and the harbours in the neighbourhood, whether it is 

 not much more likely that it will not only be barred up, but " blocked 

 up and lost?" But Nauticus (Mr. Barrett) says, " The sole cause of 

 bars at the mouths of harbours is the conflicting action of effluent cur- 

 rents passing into the ocean at right angles with the shore," and in 

 reference to this theory of Mr. Barrett, and his subsequent statement 

 that "there is no exception to this rule to be found on the whole sur- 

 face of the globe," Investigator quietly observes, "assertion is not 

 argument, nor a reference to the maps of the world, demonstration on 

 such a point." Investigator also ca'ls upon Nauticus (Mr. Barrett) 

 for the names of the scientific men who he states are converts to his 

 -theories. In Mr. Barrett's letter of the 2.5th ult., to give weight to 

 his statements he also adds, " numbering as I do among converts to my 

 thesis, some of the most eminent scientific and practical men of the 

 day ;" and again, in reference to his theory, "I state this from obser- 

 vation of more than twenty years made on harbours and bars on various 

 parts of Eurojje and in Africa." Now, Mr. Editor, I repeat with In- 

 vestigator, that it would be far more satisfactory to be able to reason 

 upon facts produced by Mr. Barrett, in lieu of loose statements, and 



the shadows of opponents. Without troubling Mr. Barrett to give us 

 an account of the rivers on the coast of Africa, (thougli by the bye I 

 have lately seen (hat an attempt has been made to get rid of the bar 

 of the Kowie River, by giving the latter a direction at right angles 

 into the sea, in lieu of its old oblique course, which by Mr. Barrett's 

 tlieory ought not to have been attended with a bar), I will merely 

 ask if my information be correct as to the statement, that the river Yare 

 (with which Mr. Barrett is locally well acquainted) is now made to dis- 

 charge its waters at right angles into the sea, and that the depth on 

 its bar is much greater than at any known former period ; or when it 

 discharged its waters into the sea with an acute angle with the shore, 

 when the navigation was nearly lost, and the inhabitants had to cut a 

 direct channel through the dunes into the sea. 



I am your obedient servant, 



W. A. Brooks. 

 Stockton-on-Ttei, June 18'11. 



KENT, THE ARCHITECT, 



Sir — While I quite agree with Mr. East in regard to Kent's merits 

 as an architect, I cannot help regretting that he should have slurred 

 them over — at least, have passed over them so lightly without at all 

 dwelling upon them, or even mentioning by name, a single building by 

 him. I am rather surprised too, that while speaking of Kent, Mr. E. 

 should not have taken Mr. Allan C\u)ningham to task, for the super- 

 cilious and even contemptous tone in which he has expressed himself 

 of one who deservedly ranked so high in his day both as an architect 

 and landscape gardener, in which last capacity he may be considered 

 the father of the so-called English style of laying out pleasure grounds. 

 A just tribute to his memory, in that character, has been paid to him 

 by the writer of a paper on the subject of ornamental gardening in the 

 Foreign Quarterly ; of Kent's abilities as a painter, perhaps, the less 

 that is said the better, but Holkham alone, would suffice for his archi- 

 tectural reputation, for though susceptible of improvement in some 

 respects, it is incontestably one of the most complete residences in the 

 kingdom, — a perfect model in regard to internal arrangement and con- 

 venience, and likewise elegance of style, and variety of effect. Every 

 part of the plan is carefully studied, and every apartment is beauti- 

 fully finished. Though by no means aiming at architectural decora- 

 tion, the statue gallery is one of the most charming rooms I ever be- 

 held, — of a beauty actually fascinating, and the \\tv! from the octagon 

 tribune at either end affords a most striking scenic eftect. Never have I 

 seen a single plan of Palladio's which at all approaches that of Holkham, 

 or I may say, which is not more or less disfigured by glaring blemishes 

 and defects. Nevertheless, Cunningham makes no scruple of saying: 

 "little interest attaches to a controversy about such a design: it is 

 heavy and monotonous, and stamped with all the faults, which were 

 many ; and all the beauties which were few, of him who proudly wrote 

 himself 'Painter, Sculptor, and Architect.' " — No doubt this is a neatly 

 turned, antithetically pointed sentence ; yet it is ungenerous and unjust; 

 particularly when it is considered what an immense stride forward 

 Kent took, from the clumsy and monotonous arrangements which had 

 till then prevailed in the mode of laying out houses of that descrip- 

 tion. 



Such being the case, I am surprised that Mr. East should not have 

 instanced Holkham, as being the noblest work of its class and period 

 in our architecture of the last century. That he is not sparing of ad- 

 miration towards Kent is evident enough ; but at the same time he has 

 expressed himself in such general — or rather such exceedingly vague 

 terms, that it is hardly possible to make out any definite meaning. 

 Nay, he almost seems to deny Kent one of his chief merits, when he 

 talks of his being an artist rather than an architect, since the princely 

 residence above-mentioned is one pre-eminently marked by excellence 

 of plan, and other strictly architectural qualities. Or shall I say that 

 Holkham did not occur to Mr. E.'s recollection when he was writing 

 his more florid than perspicuous eulogium ? If unacquainted with what 

 Arthur Young saysof Holkham, he will doubtless thank me for pointing 

 out to him that writer, whose 'Tours, though professedly agricultural, 

 contain a very great deal also of interesting matter, relative to the 

 mansions and seats he visited in different parts of tlie country, — far 

 more indeed than is to be obtained from others who have confined their 

 attention to buildings and collections of pictures. I may also here 

 mention a paper exclusively on the subject of Holkham, in the fifth 

 volume of Elmes' Annals of the Fine Arts, which may be recommended 

 as an able piece of architectural criticism. 



I remain, &e. 



Z. 



2 12 



