Cast Lead 
It was manifestly intended to harden the 
material by a strong proportion of tin and to 
reduce the elasticity of the stays bv dimin¬ 
ishing the weight of the figures. Unfortu¬ 
nately the proportion is here such that 
the pliant character of the metal has been 
entirely lost. The alloy lends itself no 
longer to the expansion of the iron stays 
which should always form one body with it. 
The iron expands in the proportion of one 
unit, the lead and tin in twice that propor¬ 
tion. Dislocation was certain to follow and 
the “ Basin of Neptune’ was the first which 
had to be restored from base to summit. 
The proportions of lead, iron and anti- 
m ony in the 
first fountains of 
Versailles made 
the composi¬ 
tion sufficiently 
strong as to re¬ 
main unbroken 
up to the present 
time. Anti¬ 
mony, being 
found dangerous 
as an alloy was 
replaced with tin 
(which only be¬ 
comes danger¬ 
ous when used 
in too large a 
proportion) and 
thus a metal 
was obtained 
which was at 
once sufficiently durable and flexible. 
MODERN ATTEMPTS AT REVIVAL 
It was no doubt the beauty of the work 
at Versailles which led M. Durand in 
1847 to essay the revival of that success 
which the craft had gained and to surmount 
the obstacles encountered in adapting lead 
to the intricate forms of modern statuary. 
These obstacles are familiar to anv foun¬ 
der. We have seen that pure lead is un¬ 
suited to the purpose. Not only is it weak 
and soft, in some situations it will yield 
under a hot sun. Neither will it flow freely 
in the mould, whose cool surface causes it to 
become quickly chilled and sluggish. Re¬ 
fusing to reach the farthest recesses, it 
quickly contracts and prevents sharpness or 
even completion of the form. Notwith¬ 
standing the fact that these difficulties can 
be easily overcome by means of alloys, the 
founder of today will meet with a smile any 
suggestion for casting statuary in lead. He 
will ask such a convincing question as this : 
after a sculptor has spent months of labor 
upon the model for a statue, why cast the 
result of that work in anv metal less certain 
and satisfactory than bronze? It is true, the 
casting is the smallest part of the work and 
it is false judgment and economy to select at 
such a juncture a metal whose only recom¬ 
mendation is the saving of a few cents in the 
cost per pound.’ Applied to ambitious 
sculpture the ar¬ 
gument holds, 
and tor such we 
let it pass. But 
it is also true that 
there is much 
minor ornament 
which can per¬ 
fectly well be 
done in lead. 
1 n this class can 
be put the nu¬ 
merous and va¬ 
ried parts of 
ton mains, vases 
and urns, flower 
boxes for the 
parterre or for 
window gardens, 
wall, roof and 
eave ornaments, 
—to name only these. Such works can 
legitimately be duplicated many times; 
indeed it is often necessary to provide them 
by the score, and then the plea for using 
lead becomes a strong one. Sand moulds, 
difficult of execution except by the most 
skilled foundrymen, may be replaced by a 
single brass mould capable of being used 
again and again. 
In England these ornaments are today 
supplied by commercial firms, either from 
their own or from architects’ designs. Sev¬ 
eral of the arts and crafts guilds,—as for in¬ 
stance Mr. George Bankart’s at Bromsgrove, 
—consider lead one of their most important 
5 Metallic lead for casting would today cost about 5 ]/ 2 cents per 
pound, and composition bronze from 1 6 to 18 cents. 
42 
