Page:The Building News and Engineering Journal, Volume 22, 1872.djvu/426

 404 THE BUILDING NEWS. May 17, 1872. age of 380ft., gently sweeping round from Bridge- street on to the Embankment, and as Mr. de Keyser, the proprietor, will abandon some land for the purpose, the Metropolitan Board of Works will be enabled so to alter the approach to the Embankment as to do away with the present dangerous crossing and the conflict of traffic now witnessed in front of the hotel. The ground floor and basement of the frontage towards the Embank- ment will consist of shops, while the hotel itself will be approached from a spacious courtyard opening by a gateway on to the Embankment. Beneath this courtyard will be the billiard room, lighted by a large skylight in the centre of the courtyard, round which carriages will drive. The hotel will be fitted up on the continental system, with a spacious dining-room. The principal apartments of the hotel will overlook the Embankment and the Thames. Mr. E. A. Gruning is the architect, and Messrs. George Trollope & Sons are the builders. a ARCH ZEOLOGICAL. Discovertrs At WeEstMinsteR ABpbry.—In the excavations consequent upon the rebuilding of the Receiver’s House at Westminster, the bases of the pillars and a part of the encaustic tile floor, as well as some other remains of the ancient chapel of S. Catherine, have been brought to light. This was the chapel of the monks’ infirmary, and was the scene of many historical incidents. The building was of the Transitional Norman date, and took the form of a parish church, with nave, aisles, and a chancel. Another discovery recently made at West- minster consists of a large number of the capitals of the pillars of the ancient Norman cloisters, some of them beautifully covered with figure subjects. Apropos to these discoveries, the Micdlesex Archxo- logical Society held a meeting in the Abbey yesterday (Thursday) the 16th. Irish Antiqurrres.—The Royal Historical and Archeological Association of Ireland has just issued to its members the second part of a complete “Corpus Inscriptionum Hibernicarum.” The two parts of this work already published are illustrated by forty-eight plates, comprising 122 examples of inscribed monuments from Clonmacnois and its neigh- bourhood alone, none of which are later than the ninth century. Socrery or BrpricAn ArcnaoLocy.—At a meeting of this Society on Tuesday week, Mr. Richard Cullin the chair, Mr. William Simpson read an interesting paper on the Haram-esh-Sherif (Mount Moriah), and the probable site and substructure of the Temple at Jerusalem, with the underground cisterns and aqueducts there. The paper was illus- trated by large drawings of sectional views of the hill. A discussion followed, in which Captain C. W. Wilson, R.E., one of the most active and successful practical explorers of Jerusalem antiquities, gave an account of the water-supply of the Temple. Sir Charles Nicholson and other members joined in the discussion. a TO CORRESPONDENTS. (We do not hold ourselves responsible for the opinions of our correspondents. The Editor respectfully requests that all communications should be drawn up as briefly as possible, as there are many claimants upon the space allotted to correspondence.] To Our READERS.—We shall feel obliged to any of our readers who will favour us with brief notes of works con- templated or in progress in the provinces. Letters relating to advertisements and the ordinary business of the Paper should be addressed to the EDITOR, 31, TAVISTOCK-STREET, COVENT-GARDEN, W.C. Advertisements for the current week must reach the office not later than 5 p.m. on Thursday. TO AMERICAN AND BELGIAN SUBSCRIBERS. In answer to numerous inquiries, the Publisher begs to state that subscribers in the United States can be supplied with the BUILDING NEws, post free from this Office, for the sum of 17s, 4d. (4 dols. 16c., gold) per annum, and in Belgium for the sum of 21 francs, payable in advance. The remittance should, in all cases, be made by international Post-office Order. = American and Belgian Subscribers, especially when renewing their subscriptions, are particularly requested to atlvise the Publisher of the transmission of the Post-Office Order, and the exact amount for which it is made payable. Reckiven'—F, B.—W. H.-H. & B—A. $.—C. T. R—J.H. —H. W.—J. G.—T. & Co.—J. M‘L.—E. W. T.—C. B. A— G. & Sons. —Inquirer.—J. A. B—E. W. G.—J. D.—J. P. 8. —E. J.—W. & B.—F. A. P. A SUBSCRIRER.— Write to the secretary of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Great George-street, Westminster. W. T. T.—Your reply is an advertisement. ©. C. O.—The poetry respectfully declined. W. M.—Address secretary of the Dudley Gallery, London. ‘T. W. T.—The drawing was returned. Correspondence, — ne THE RESTORATION OF LLANDAFF CATHEDRAL. To the Editor of the Burrpixe News. Sm,—I fully appreciate the laudatory terms in which so competent an authority as Mr. Mackenzie Walcott has spoken of my restoration of Llandaff Cathedral. But as he has asked if it be not possible to remove what he considers its two defects, will you afford me the opportunity to offer a word or two in explanation? In the first place, as to the protrusion of the trumpet-pipes of the organ, I must refer him to that high authority Sir Frederick Gore Ousley, under whose immediate supervision the organ was built by Messrs. Gray & Davison, when I have no doubt that very satisfactory reasons will be assigned for the course that was followed. But as to the more complicated question of discarding the old reredos, although the responsibility was shared by my late friend Dean Conybeare, yet I am quite willing to assume the whole of it. It is only fair to say that this same objection has been previously raised by my friend Mr. Edward Freeman and by Mr. Beresford Hope, so that it becomes still more imperative that I should give the reasons, as I have already publicly done, which influenced me in taking the steps which have provoked so much criticism. On removing a solid thick modern wall built against the east end of the Presbytery, I dis- covered the fine old Norman arch between it and the lady chapel, and lower down I came to the mutilated remains of a Late Second Pointed reredos, which stretched across the entire length of the Presbytery, but had been so maltreated by the Vandals who built the wall that in the event of its restoration scarcely a stone of it could have been re-used, and therefore it would have been but a mere copy of the original, and of little interest, especially as it would have been but a comparatively small part of the whole design, which Brown Willis informs us consisted of two other ranges of niches filled with imagery, so that the so-called restoration would have consisted of one part a modern copy, and the two more impor- tant parts purely conjectural. In addition to this, the adaptation of the reredos tu its position involved the destruction of the jambs of the fine old Norman arch, which Dean Conybeare so highly prized that he preferred its complete restoration to the loss of the reredos, the more so as the state of his funds forbade all hope of his realising so ambitious a dream as the restoration of such a costly feature as the old reredos must have been. At this time, be it remembered, by far the largest part of the main restoration of the cathedral had yet to be accom- plished. Moreover, at this juncture a very liberal offer from Mr. Rossetti to paint befitting subjects was too tempting to decline, and this determined the matter. Whether these paintings are, as Mr. Walcott describes them, feeble, I must leave to more compe- tent persons who are familiar with that great artist's works to determine, but, speaking for myself, Ishould say neyer was aterm so misapplied, but de gustibus non disputandum. I am by no means wedded to the existing reredos as a whole, and perhaps no one would more rejoice than myself if I were called upon to reconsider the matter, and the only prospect of doing so would be by the sale of these feeble paintings, when the price I believe they would realise would probably cause the seales to drop from Mr. Walcott’s eyes.—I am, &e., J. Pricwarp, Chapter and Diocesan Architect. Llandaff, May 15. PICTURESQUE HOUSE PLANNING. Sim,—May I be allowed a short space in your columns to say a few words respecting a subject suggested to me by Mr. Norman Shaw’s admirable design for Cragside ? No one who considers that design can deny its author the possession of a thoroughly artistic appre- ciation of effective grouping and outline influencing his works most successfully, and no one who con- trasts this design, or those of the few masters equally great in the same way, with the designs produced by the majority of those who aim at the picturesque, can doubt that effective grouping and outline are elements sadly wanting in most of their buildings. Setting aside the fact that the artistic instinct (with- out some portion of which no man can be a true architect, painter, sculptor, or poet) is distributed in varying degree among the members of the archi- tectural profession, and by them variously culti- vated, I believe that the great cause why so large a number of our buildings are so ineffective in out- } ine and mass results from the system on which we design them, and from the aims we propose to ourselves in their design, A plan fulfilling, as well as can be, certain rigid requirements ; elevations raised on the basis of this plan, and designed on the flat; slight mutual concessions; the plan submitting to be modified by the elevations, and they in turn yielding some of their ambition to theplan. This is generally the order of the day, and the way in which we work; and I am afraid that by the time we have satisfied the conflicting claims.of plans and elevations, and have driven those unsolved residual difficulties which haunt all our buildings into the darkest corner, our artistic sense is somewhat jaded, and ourselves willing to hurry the work out of hand. . Now, it seems to me that herein we fail in not re- garding our design as a solid to be mentally mani- pulated until it takes such form in the imagination as shall satisfy the artistic sense, and lend itself to the requirements of a convenient plan. A building so designed ought to charm us (as Mr. Shaw’s does) by the ingenious and picturesque distribution of parts, and by an impressive totality of effect, even were it but a solid mass without any of those many features which, skilfully handled, give beauty and life to the body on which they appear, but which are too often used to veil its inherent deformity.—I am, &e., A. P. GoopMAN. HOUSE PLANNING COMPETITION.—THE CRITICS CRITICISED. Smr,—If it be true, as stated elsewhere, that house planning is not sufficiently understood, it is also clearly obvious to those who have read your correspondence columns that still greater chaos exists among the critics. As this competition is not yet done with it may be useful to analyse the criti- cisms (if they can be called such) of the designs already published. Taking them in order of merit, 1 find Mr. Lockwood ‘pulled over the coals ” for culling ideas from Bignell House, Oxford, although it appears to me he did well in selecting a good model to work upon. The referees condemned his method of entrance, which, on the other hand, a Belfast correspondent approved. Instead of the usual landing, Mr. Lockwood provided a gallery and well-hole on first floor, and was severely treated for doing so; but design 24 was roundly abused for containing quite the reverse! ‘‘ Domus” endured reiterated comment because of the position of the doors; in design 24 the doors are, with scarcely an exception, arranged to accommodate the furniture and obscure the rooms from without as much as possible, and ‘‘a great deal of eccentricity ” was the epithet applied to it. Mr. Lockwood’s is described as “lacking individuality of design.” No. 24 is sneered at for aiming at architectural effect, the author abused for executing work cheaply, and told in plain terms that he had no business to engage in the competition ! “F, T.” airs himself with remarkable assump- tion of authority, but at the same time discloses his inability to read a plan, and declares “dark” the front and back lobbies of design 24, although each have almost unobstructed window openings of about 60ft. superficial, besides other lights, for ground and first floor. Other features in the design he ignores altogether. In these respects his incapa- city may be pitied. Some time ago the Times remarked that probably the present system of water- closet arrangement would never be improved until at least one architect and one builder were hung for the calamities they inflict. If that is so I know of no more fitting victim than ‘F.T.,” for it would be difficult to surpass the contempt with which he treats this matter. Enough has been said to show that the majority of critics lose themselves over the minutix of detail, and fail to comprehend the chief and general features of design, to which all other considerations are secondary, though not without interest. Unless, therefore, future writers on this subject will be more circumspect in their statement, elevated in tone, and above all, truthful, the good of this competition will be greatly marred, and your correspondence columns brought into contempt. I shall not be thought presumptuous in stating that in my opinion the chief characteristics of design to which attention should be primarily directed, are as follows: (1) General disposition of the block; (2) Aspect and number of principal rooms and window space; (3) The contiguity or relative dispo- sition of principal rooms and offices, and propor- tions of each; (4) Connection and disposition of the walls and partitions on the various floors and roofs ; (5) Architectural treatment. A building which is satisfactory on all these points can hardly fail to satisfy the most exacting client.—I am, &c., James Hicks.