484 
APPENDIX. 
In many situations, this walk, as seen on paper, would be considered 
to be too near the boundary ; but in the grounds the narrow plantation 
from 22 to 18 is of evergreens, chiefly hollies, which already partially 
shut out all view of the boundary or the field, and which are ultimately 
intended to spread their upper branches over the walk, so as to give it a 
character of shade and gloom, different from any other in these grounds. 
In general, it may be laid down as a rule, that the boundary between 
a lawn and the park or field beyond should not be such as to cut the land- 
scape, as it were, in two ; and another rule is, that the walks should 
never be so near this fence, or should not be so conducted when near it, 
as to admit of the spectator looking directly across. Indeed, in scenery, 
no rule is generally more applicable than this, viz. that all straight lines, 
whether fences, roads, canals, or rivers, and all regular symmetrical ob- 
jects, such as buildings, should be looked at obliquely. Applying this 
rule, therefore, to the scenery between the walk and the fence, from 18 
to 16, we should say that either the direction of the walk ought to be al- 
tered, so as to remove it further from the boundary, or the boundary ex- 
tended further into the field ; and instead of being bordered by a hedge- 
like fringe of shrubs, it should only be broken here and there by occa- 
sional bushes and trees, connected and harmonizing in position with 
other trees beyond the fence. If it were desirable to avoid altering the 
boundary, then we should recommend continuing the walk which com- 
mences at d near 19, by n and o o, to p near 16. If there were nothing 
to see or be seen beyond the boundary, then, unless the boundary fence 
were a conservative wall, that is, a wall covered with half-hardy orna- 
mental plants, we should still prefer changing the direction of the walk, 
so as to take away from the monotonous appearance of continually skirt- 
ing the boundary. In every place, however small, there ought to be 
some part left which the visiter has not seen, and which may leave the 
impression on his mind, that, however much he has been shown, he has 
not seen every thing. We make these observations with great deference 
to Mr. Harrison, who has paid much attention to the subject of Landscape 
Gardening, and shown much practical taste and good sense both in that 
art and in architecture. 
It is however, right to state that Mr. Harrison accords with our gene- 
ral view of the subject, but “ defends the walk in question as an excep- 
tion founded on his objects in making it ; which were, 1st, to have a 
