VERSAILLES. 241 



What, then, are we to think of those who carry the dead 

 lines and changeless triumphs of the building and the studio 

 into the garden, which, above any other artificial creation, 

 should give us the sweetest and most wholesome " fellow- 

 ship with nature" ? 



Simply that it is presumption and bad taste, founded 

 upon ignorance of what a true garden ought to be, and of 

 knowledge that the deadliest thing yon can do with it is to 

 introduce any feature which, unlike the materials of our world- 

 designer, never changes. Away, then, with the wretched 

 affectation of pretending to enjoy — away with the ignorance 

 which asserts or blindly beheves that there is some mys- 

 terious and occult beauty in, or necessity for, such gardens 

 as this ! 



It is perfectly true that there are some positions where 

 an intrusion of architecture and embankments into the 

 garden is justifiable — nay, even now and then necessary ; 

 but the misfortune is that they are often said to be so when 

 such is not the case. It would be a waste of space to quote 

 the nonsense that is printed and urged about things being 

 "in keeping/' — the necessity of making an architectural 

 garden associate with some particular style of building, and so 

 on. The best terrace gardens in continental countries are 

 those built where the nature of the ground most calls for 

 them and usually in positions where the ground is steep and 

 rugged ; and it is in positions most like these that they 

 best succeed, and are most wanted in this country. Why, 

 then, talk of " congruity " in the matter, when it is con- 

 sidered right to place the most geometrical kind of garden 

 in the spots where the ground is most picturesque and ir- 

 regular ? There is no code of taste resting on any real 

 foundation which proves that garden or park should have 

 any extensive stonework or geometrical arrangement. Many 

 instances could be given to prove that the natural or nearly 

 natural disposition of the ground is far preferable to the great 

 majority of expensive mathematical gardens. 



Among other not often urged objections to great expen- 

 diture on architectural embellishments, costly fountains, 

 and statues, instead of on the development of the real life and 



