to the bodily eye. We know of several cases besides St. Mary's at Oxford, where such restorations have been subsequently amended with ground glass or holland blinds, which have made us regret the previous small green panes of half decomposed glass which did us good service without our knowing it.

But this leads us to notice the inconsistency of building new churches with windows suited only to painted glass, though the builders may not only have no intention, but even have a decided objection to that material. Our modern churches are as light as greenhouses, so that after all the north and south windows have been cut in two by galleries, and modified with ground glass or blinds; after the great west window has been entirely concealed by the organ, after the east window has been somewhat subdued with a green baize curtain rising up half its height, even then the church is offensively light. The devout worshipper cannot hide himself from day's garish eye; the anxious listener, trying to watch the lips of the preacher, can scarce with aching eyes detect anything but a dark outline projected on a dazzling field of light behind; which latter evil is of course not a little aggravated when the pulpit is placed in the middle aisle.* Much as some of our modern church builders will be shocked to hear it, they have entailed the necessity of painted glass on the commonest principles of comfort and convenience; and if a revival of taste and an increase in the number of clergymen should put an end to galleries, and bring into view the whole of the windows which they now partially obstruct, there will be found an absolute necessity for more painted glass, and for deeper shades, than a few light orange panes round the sides, such as Mr. Carus Wilson has introduced at Casterton.

We do not like "windows glazed with diamond panes in lead and square panes round the sides." The panes should all be diamond, as in that case the diagonal lines of division not only do not interfere with the plan of the stone work, but set off its perpendicular lines to better advantage. Necessity requires some mechanical arrangement of the glass, and that should be as uniform and as contrary to the bearings of the mullions and tracery as possible. Square panes, i. e. horizontal and perpendicular divisions, make confusion; still worse do " square panes round the sides," i. e. lines in the lead work, purposely following the mullions at the distance of a few inches, especially when they further attempt to adapt themselves to the tracery. We have seen such lines actually

We are informed that at a well known fashionable chapel in the metropolis, where this inconvenience was felt, it has been made the occasion of a most successful piece of dramatic display. While the preacher is ascending the pulpit, a red curtain slowly descends behind it. The effect, we are told by those who have witnessed it, is truly imposing.

increase to clumsiness the apparent effect of slender mullions. We must warn such of our readers as are likely to tempt the dangerous seas of church building, that no class of people require more sharply looking after than the painters, glaziers, and other subordinates in that complicated work. Even without Mr. Carus Wilson to advise them, their own heads are sufficiently fruitful in evil devices to make them unsafe to be left alone.

In a country church, where the parsonage is close at hand, there seems little need of a vestry. It is useful of course to the crack preachers of the metropolis, some of whom sit there and comfort themselves during the service, that they may come forth fresh as giants to the event of the day-the sermon. It is said also, that Doctor Parr used to illustrate his attachment to rural psalmody, by smoking in the vestry during the performances of the choir, which were purposely accommodated to the time usually occupied by a pipe. But few country clergymen will emulate either of these examples, and there is really nothing they would do in a vestry, which may not be done with perfect propriety in the church. We think it desirable to avoid the appearance of privacy in the movements of the clergyman. Yet it is the fashion now to consider it indispensable, and manifold therefore are the shifts which modern church contrivers are thrown upon, by the difficulties which a vestry seems to throw in the way of that other sine quâ non, external uniformity. The idol of taste and the idol of convenience cannot be brought to agree. Mr. Carus Wilson makes a vestry out of the lower story of the tower and gives the drawing of a large square window with two mullions, lighting the ground floor of the tower at Hurst Green, a sister Church to Casterton, and recommends it as preferable to the smaller window occupying the same place at the latter. If there must be a vestry, why not add it to the side of the building, where something is often wanted to break the mass. But Mr. Carus Wilson's mode of finding room for a vestry is not so objectionable as some others, which this ingenious age has brought into vogue.

We quite agree with Mr. Carus Wilson in thinking fine ashlar work unnecessary, and even unsuitable for ordinary village churches-and we regret that much expense has been wasted on squaring and smoothing stones, which might have been applied in procuring good proportions, in dispensing with galleries, and in other such unquestionable advantages. Casterton church, we are told, "is built of limestone, and the stones are placed in course, but are very little hammered beyond what is necessary for securing the joints; and indeed the rough appearance is preferred, as giving more the appearance of antiquity."-(p. 8). He even recommends random walls, whose poverty, he says, may be conNO. LIL-Oct. 1839.

1 1

cealed by ivy, which will repay the kindness by protecting the walls and foundations from rain. It is sincerely to be hoped that this is true and that if it be true, ivy will be very generally used as a veil of charity to cover the sins of most of our modern structures. With the following suggestions also we entirely concur:

"Whatever style or plan is adopted, it is strongly recommended to avoid the use of valley gutters. They are troublesome enough, especially in snow, in private houses, where there is every advantage of care; but in the case of a Church it is well to guard as far as possible against the chance of injury arising from the uncertain attentions of those who have the charge of it. If the snow is left to melt in a valley-gutter, it must unavoidably find its way under the slate and damage the interior."-p. 12. "The open roof, with ceiling laid on the spars, cannot be too strongly recommended. It is most in Church character, as far as appearance is concerned; and while no bad effect results to the voice of the clergyman, if common care be taken, it is most favorable for the effect of singing and the organ. At Hurst Green, where a church is building upon exactly the same plan, the situation being exposed, it was recommended to plank the roof entirely, like a boarded floor, before slating, in order to give additional security to the slates; this plan has certainly advan tages. The spars are so contrived as to present inside square compartments, which are smooth and will be painted oak colour pannelled; superseding the necessity of plaster ceiling. The internal appearance, as well as the security of the roof will be greatly benefited; and as the additional expense is only about 301. excepting painting, it is decidedly recommended in all cases."-p. 8, 9.

Shingles are better, more agreeable to the eye, and more durable than slating; and the compartments between the spars should not be square. Mr. Bardwell, we observe, objects strongly to plastering between the spars, but it must be remembered, that a planked roof, covered not with lead, but slate, will not be air tight, which in this climate is perhaps necessary, at least part of the year. But the plan of the roof which Mr. Carus Wilson has presented to us, is of that sort which least bears to be exposed. The tie-beams do not rest on the walls; there are therefore required braces passing obliquely from the foot of the rafters on one side, to the corresponding rafters on the other, at three-fourths of their height. The inclination of these braces makes, so to speak, a discord with the inclination of the rafters. The common kind of roof, with the tie-beam resting on the walls, is less objectionable. If the principal of the roof can be made to assume the form of an arch, without having really any lateral pressure, that will best suit a church; but the Westminster-Hall kind of roof is too compli cated a compages, and has too artificial an air for a sacred building. Mr. Carus Wilson is entitled to the gratitude of Churchmen for not putting his reading desk and pulpit right before the altar; but quite clear of it, at the north-east corner of the Church; and

for leaving a decent interval between the rails of the chancel and the seats of the congregation.

Mr. Shaw's book is evidently produced under the pressure of the times. A large population, anxious to have its religion manufactured at the smallest cost, drives the modern architect to do violence to his taste, to make the best of a bad job, and to put forth plans which he himself perhaps is the first to condemn. Scarce a church rises from the ground anywhere, except now and then in some unwonted hour of public munificence, or under the kindly influence of some wealthy patron, which does not bear evidence of the hard limitations which cramped the designer's fingers

"Chill poverty repressed his noble rage,

And froze the genial current of his soul."

Mr. Shaw's propositions are in our opinion very valuable, and deserve a careful consideration; but while the deserve it, they also require it. They are suggested, he says, by the contemplation of the Lombard architecture, chiefly, it appears, as exhibited in Mr. Hope's interesting work, p. 30, "containing," as Mr. Shaw remarks, " in an eminent degree, the qualities now so important; these appear to be, first, economy; secondly, facility of execution; thirdly, strict simplicity, combined with high capability of ornament; fourthly, durability; fifthly, beauty.

We were quite prepared for the attempt to adapt that style to modern churches, having spent some time on it ourselves on the first appearance of Mr. Hope's book, though we cannot flatter ourselves on our success. A modified adoption of this style may be considered the main project in this publication, but as parts of it and as additions to it, Mr. Shaw proposes the use of two stories of pillars and arches in interiors, the lower one to support the galleries; the use of undisguised brick both inside. and out; the exposure of the timbers of the roof; the use of red deal, merely varnished; and an increased number of doorways. After expressing with greater resignation than becomes the dignity of an artist, his acquiescence in the conditions imposed on him," to provide in the interior arrangements the most ample accommodation, at the least possible expense," he thus proceeds:— "To this necessity may be traced the introduction of galleries, obviously the readiest means afforded by the nature of the case for the fulfilment of that condition; but it is the object of the following pages to show, if possible, first, that this apparent necessity has unavoidably caused considerable deviation from the principles, and fatal injury to the character and effect of the various beautiful styles of architecture adopted; and, secondly, that this alleged necessity may be entirely divested of the objectionable circumstances which have been attendant upon it, by the employment of a principle simple and graceful in itself, supported by

ancient authority and success, and complying partly with the unavoidable demand made by existing causes for the strictest economy.

"That the perpendicular line, the prevailing principle and genius of the early English and Tudor architecture, is most obtrusively and oppressively violated by the introduction of the horizontal lines, of the modern gallery, is a fact, which has, I doubt not, in numberless instances, excited the regret of architects, on whom circumstances have forced its employment; a regret, heightened by the reflection, not only that their lofty aisles must be severed by these inevitable horizontal lines but by the observation that the extent and flatness of the surfaces, bounded by those lines, presented another, and if possible a more powerful proof of the incongruity and incompatibility between the gallery and the rest of the erection.

"My attention having for some time been directed to this subject, and having been recently engaged in the design of a Church proposed to be built under the direction of her Majesty's Commissioners, I have endeavoured to introduce, for its internal arrangement, a principle new

A

B

in its application to modern Churches; and which, while it obviates the imperfection to which I have adverted, is sound in its construction, and would, as I am about to show, be attended with no additional expense."-pp. 5-7.

"Plate 1, letter A, exhibits the ordinary principle of modern church building; the gallery front crossing the arches of the side aisles and dividing the windows; they are constructed with timber framing, covered with boarding; the piers they rest upon are generally from fourteen feet to seventeen feet apart; their material being usually stone or iron.

"Plate 1, letter B, and Plate 2, (which exhibit the principle I beg respectfully to suggest), represent the gallery supported on a series of semicircular arches of fourteen inch brickwork, resting on slender iron columns, ten feet apart, which is the distance prescribed by the regulations of her Majesty's Commissioners for the space between the tie beams of the roof and the main timbers of the gallery.' The front of the gallery is proposed to be constructed of nine inch brickwork; over the lower arches is a simiWe have not attempted a copy of this plate. It may be as well to notice here an error in our copy of Plate 1, letter A. In Mr. Shaw's engraving the gallery is made to divide in two one long window. In our cut the window is made to appear two distinct ones.