1842.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



295 



require the lanthem of Diogenes to discover an honest man in broad 

 daylight; and so far he maybe an honour-to it. With that amount of 

 praise, or rather self-praise, he onght, however, to content himself, 

 for he is not likely to obtain much in addition to it. 



Two lithographs have lately appeared, purporting to be an Exterior 

 and Interior View of the Proposed New Church, Kentish Town, St. 

 Pancras, inscribed "Alfied Bartholomew, Esq. F.S. A., Architect, War- 

 wick House, Gray's Inn," which unusually minute piece of information 

 looks somewhat too much like an advertisement or shop-card, were it 

 not for the insertion of the "^sg. .' " Still that is merely matter of 

 taste, though too much a la John Britton, yet hardly in worse taste 

 than the design itself, which is'one of the strangest jumbles conceiv- 

 able both as to style (Gothic) and as to the very inequality of character, 

 for while in some respects it is ostentatiously showy, in others it is 

 deplorably mean and insignificant. The exterior and interior are 

 strikingly at variance with each other; the former — at least its front, 

 looking at first sight more as if intended for that of a cathedral than 

 of a moderate-sized church, while the interior is homely even to shab- 

 biness, besides being, in point of design, hardly a degree better than 

 carpenter's or Strawberry Hill Gothic. There is no unity of principle; 

 nor does Mr. B. seem to have paid any regard to such economic 

 management of the funds at his disposal or intended to be raised, as 

 would have produced a tolerably consistent keeping up of character 

 throughout. It now looks as if he had found out that nearly all the 

 money would be required for the front of his building, scarely any being 

 left for the rest of it ; he would therefore have done well to have re- 

 trenched from what now seems strange extravagance there, bestowed 

 some decoration, or even some tolerable finish as to detail, where it is 

 now evidently wanting, and that in a very disagreeable degree. If instead 

 of two towers and spires, he had contented himself with one, he would 

 have been able to bestow some panelling on the fronts of the galleries, 

 and to pay more attention to detail generally within the building. 

 Neither would the exterior itself have suffered by such retrenchment, 

 for at present the front seems too crowded up and overdone ; and the 

 little projection — apparently intended for a vestry — between the 

 porches in the lower part of the towers, is a feature that, so far from 

 agreeing with the rest, either as to style or any thing else, is no 

 better than an eye-sore, and looks paltry in itself, and throws 

 the whole out of keeping. As to keeping, however, that seems to 

 have been scarcely attended to at all ; for as far as the side which is 

 seen can be made out, thrown so much as it is into perspective, the 

 front is a mere mask to the rest, the character there aimed at being 

 carried on no farther. In fact, as shown by the interior view, the side 

 windows have neither muUions nor tracery, but ai'e mere holes in a 

 wall, and that none of the thickest. Whether it be owing to bad 

 drawing or not — and the perspective at least is strangely incorrect — 

 the whole of the interior has a very disagreeable look, it being not 

 only very plain, but remarkably poor in character, with at the same 

 time a good deal which is fantastic — for instance, the small round 

 windows over the pillars that support the arches. The whole, in 

 short, has a singular, meagre, starved appearance, altogether different 

 from that sober style which might excuse or might readily be 

 excused by economy. If such very rigid economy is thought necessary 

 for this part of the building, why is there so much tawdry parade and 

 pretension in the exterior? It is surely not at all in accordance with 

 what either judicious economy of design, or the commonest rules of 

 good taste, would dictate. 



No doubt my remarks will be thought no more agreeable and liberal 

 in feeling by Mr. Bartholomew, than were his own wholesale aspersions 

 of the profession, by his brother architects. Still they are such as he 

 may profit by, unless he should find, upon further consideration, that he 

 can really produce nothing better than this lame abortive design. At 

 all events he will perhaps now learn to speak with a little more re- 

 serve if not respect of others, since he has certainly not shown himself 

 to be at ail superior to them in talent. 



I remain, &c. 



An Architect. 



THE INSTITUTE AND ITS TRANSACTIONS. 



Sir — Since no notice was taken of it in the review of the "Trans- 

 actions of the Institute of British Architects," allow me to make some 

 comments on what struck myself most forcibly, on looking at the 

 title-page. I mean the appearance of Messrs. Longmans' names as 

 the publishers. I have nothing whatevi'r to object to that highly 

 respectable house, and had they been appointed publishers in the first 

 instance, no exception could have been taken at it; but it does look 

 like aa exceedingly strange " transaction " on the part of the Institute, 



that they should have taken the work out of the hands of its first 

 publisher, and placed it elsewhere — that publisher being one who is 

 in a manner identified with the architectural profession, who has done 

 so much in undertaking and bringing out works that might else never 

 have appeared, and who is therefore justly entitled to all the coun- 

 tenance and support the profession as a body can show liim. 



Putting aside all reference to that individual, it certainly does seem 

 — to myself, at least — very ungracious and impolitic in that body which 

 represents — or would, in the eyes of the public, appear to represent — the 

 architectural profession and its interests, to withdraw from Jlr. Weale 

 almost the only compliment they could show him; more especially 

 after receiving from him as presents, from time to time, books to 

 which it would have become them to have been subscribers and pur- 

 chasers ! Call you this backing your friends? Is this the way to 

 promote enterprise in a branch of publication which, standing as it 

 does upon a very different footing from that of general literature, 

 requires more than ordinary encour.igemeut from those whose studies 

 are aided by it? Probably the Institute may have made a "better bar- 

 gain ;" by acting as they have done, they may have saved, or else they 

 hope to get, perhaps, a few shillings extra. Perhaps — for there is room 

 now for any suspicion — they tried every publisher in town, from Burling- 

 ton and Great Marlborough Streets to Finch Lane, or farther, if a " far- 

 ther" there be, before they entered into treaty with the " Row." The 

 advantage they have gained ought to be great, for great is the paltriness 

 of having even thought of seeking for it. But though the odium of 

 the "transaction" falls upon the Institute, I do not imagine it met 

 with the concurrence of all or even a majority of the members. At 

 least, I know one or two who look upon it in pretty much the same 

 light as I do myself. 



Dismissing this matter, 1 have to remark that, as far as the volume 

 itself is concerned, there is very little in it indeed to identify it with 

 the Institute, or which manifests any of that co-operation to be ex- 

 pected from a body established, it may be presumed, to effect what 

 the zeal and study of individuals cannot pretend to accomplish. What 

 we obtain from it is altogether the result of private study and indi- 

 vidual diligence ; and one of the most valuable papers in the "Trans- 

 actions" is a contribution from one who is not a professional architect. 

 Very far am I from complaining at meeting with papers of that class, 

 the acceptance of which is rather creditable than otherwise to the 

 Institute, because it shows liberality of feeling towards amateur 

 students. What I complain of is, that there is nothing to show either 

 what the Institute has done, or what has been done in architecture, 

 during the time it has been established, and since the publication of 

 tjie first portion of its Transactions. There are no official documents 

 or records of any kind ; no official report upon the chief of the very 

 numerous buildings erected or undertaken during that interval, both 

 in this country and upon the continent; no extracts from the corres- 

 pondence of foreign members, nor any authentic information so de- 

 rived ; no notice of foreign publications presented to the Institute — I 

 do not mean critical notices or reviews of them, but simple statements 

 explaining their contents. Nay, there is not a single record of the 

 briefest kind of any of the more eminent men in the profession who 

 have died within the last five or six years, either British or foreign. 

 Wilkins, Wyatville, Rickmann, Foulston, Albertolli, Antolini, Schin- 

 kel — some, if not all, members of the Institute, have within that 

 period terminated their earthly labours ; yet not one syllable of record 

 has been bestowed upon their memories or their works, by the Institute 

 whose "Transactions" are in that respect, and not in that respect 

 alone, a complete blank. After this let us hear no jnore of the public 

 indifference to architecture, when even the Royal Institute of British 

 Architects shows itself to be infected with almost inexcusable apathy. 

 The members and council of the Institute would do well to recollect, 

 that though they themselves may choose to shut their eyes to what 

 ought to be done by them for the advancement of architecture as a 

 liberal study, they cannot hinder other people from opening theirs, 

 and keeping awake to them and their proceedings. 



I remain. 

 Yours, &c. 



A GREATER ADMIRER OF ARCHITECTURE THAN OF THE InSTITITTE. 



REMARKS ON THE CLAIMS OF ARCHITECTS. 



Sir— The first two articles in the August No. of your Journal tempt 

 me to make a few observations; for although the remarks therein are 

 no doubt generally good and useful, they certainly do appear to me 

 rather too sweeping and unqualified. 



In the first article, the merits of the Threadneedle St. structure (and 



2 S 2 



