STUDIES AND EXAMPLES 
 
 OF THE 
 
 MODERN SCHOOL 
 
 ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 THE TRAVELLERS’ CLUB HOUSE, 
 
 BY CHARLES BARRY, ARCHITECT: 
 
 ILLUSTRATED BY 
 
 DRAWINGS MADE BY MR. HEWITT, AND ENGRAVED BY MR. J. H. LE KEUX. 
 
 ACCOMPANIED BY 
 
 AN ESSAY ON THE PRESENT STATE OF ARCHITECTURAL STUDY 
 
 AND THE REVIVAL OF THE ITALIAN STYLE, 
 
 BY W. H. LEEDS, 
 
 EDITOR OF THE ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE PUBLIC BUILDINGS OF LONDON, &C. &C. 
 
 LONDON: JOHN WEALE. 
 
 MDCCCXXXIX. 
 
TO 
 
 AMATEURS AND PROFESSORS OF THE ART 
 
 
 Cfott Volume 
 
 INTENDED AS THE COMMENCEMENT OF A WORK 
 
 ON 
 
 MODE RN 
 
 ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE 
 
 IS INSCRIBED 
 
 BY THEIR OBEDIENT SERVANT 
 
 JOHN WE ALE. 
 
 59, High Hoi-born, 
 
 June 1, 1839. 
 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 Very little is required in the way of Preface, as the Essay which accompanies the Plates consists, 
 for the most part, of general prefatory matter, serving to explain the views with which the work 
 has been undertaken; nor is it at all necessary to state any thing here with regard to certain of 
 the opinions there brought forward, for hardly can the purport of them be misunderstood ; and 
 should they be deemed censurable, hardly would any kind of apology procure for them approbation. 
 
 It will be sufficient, therefore, to call attention to the object and character of this publication 
 as a Series of Architectural Studies of the present English School. One material difference between 
 it and previous works of the kind which have been brought out in this country, whether as collections 
 of buildings by different architects, or the designs of an individual, is the completeness with which 
 the building selected for the purpose is illustrated and elucidated, not only with regard to sections 
 as well as plans and elevations, but also by details and parts at large ; without which latter the 
 other drawings lose much of their value,—perhaps are in some degree rather injurious to the youthful 
 student, because only the general forms are presented to him ; the consequence of which is that 
 sufficient attention is not paid by him to that kind of character, and to that finish, which depend 
 upon detail. 
 
 It was, perhaps, to be expected that, instead of being the speculation of an individual, a work 
 of this nature would have emanated from one or other of the two Architectural Bodies which have 
 been established of late years in the Metropolis, expressly for the purpose of supporting the dignity 
 of the profession, and advancing architectural taste. Brought out under such auspices, and bearing 
 such authority, a series of the productions of the Modern English School would doubtless have 
 proved more worthy of public attention and patronage, and would have carried with it more 
 importance in the eyes of foreigners, who, for want of evidence of the kind, are apt to conclude 
 that we have nothing among our recent buildings worth being studied, or else are culpably remiss 
 in forbearing to communicate proofs of it to other countries. Yet, notwithstanding that the Publisher 
 suggested such an undertaking to several members of the profession, who, it may be presumed, 
 could at once perceive the expediency of it in the latter point of view, and as asserting our 
 national character in this branch of art, they have shown no inclination to embark in such an 
 enterprise. 
 
 It was in a very different spirit that the Institution of Civil Engineers received a somewhat 
 similar proposal made to them a few years since by Mr. Weale; for the active and intelligent 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 viii 
 
 President of that Society immediately exerted himself in behalf of the scheme so suggested, the 
 utility and success of which may be inferred from the extensive sale which the volumes of their 
 Transactions have obtained. The study of Military Engineering, aided by the exertions of Lieut. 
 Wm. Denison, has likewise been prosecuted with similar assiduity, as is testified by the published 
 Papers of the Royal Engineers. 
 
 Yet, although a greater rather than less degree of diligence and zeal,— something partaking of 
 enthusiasm,—might be expected to animate the members of a profession which requires them to 
 cultivate their tastes as artists, as well as advance in practical knowledge, such spirit does not seem 
 as yet to actuate them in this country; consequently, whatever individual talent there may be among 
 them, as a body they lay themselves open to the reproaches which, although doubtless unmerited, 
 have been brought against them both by foreigners and some of their own countrymen. 
 
 The present work will, it is hoped, do something towards vindicating their taste and ability, 
 if not their eagerness to do justice to themselves. At all events, the building here selected as a 
 study will bear a comparison with any other in the same style, and upon the same scale. To what 
 extent the work itself will be continued, or how soon it may be terminated, will depend upon the 
 encouragement given to it; the Publisher making no pledge of any kind as to a point in which he 
 must be guided by motives of expediency; while to purchasers it is one of no moment whatever, 
 otherwise than as they may be desirous that it should be carried on; because each part will be 
 quite distinct in itself, and so far complete, whether accompanied with any of the others or not. 
 
 Respecting the mode of illustration adopted for the work, the specimen here submitted renders 
 it unnecessary to say any thing, except it be to remark that for the taste as well as accuracy 
 with which the drawings have been made, it is no more than due to Mr. J. Hewitt to acknowledge 
 the ability he has manifested as an architectural draftsman. 
 
AN ESSAY 
 
 MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 BY W. H. LEEDS, ESQ. 
 
 The apologies of authors are seldom better than either awkward misgivings, or indirect 
 acknowledgments that, whether it be unavoidably or wilfully, they are doing what is 
 open to censure. No excuse, therefore, shall here be offered for attaching to a work 
 intended to afford specimens and studies of our actual school of English architecture, 
 some initiatory observations relative to the condition of the art itself, and the influences 
 which tend to check its advancement in this country. 
 
 The peculiar, not to say equivocal, position of architecture, occasioned by its compound 
 character of a mechanical and a fine art, is attended with disadvantages, both to its 
 professors and the public, from which the other liberal arts are exempt. In one respect, 
 indeed, it appears to have circumstances in its favour which the latter have not; because, 
 whatever may be the state of public taste, how great soever the general apathy towards 
 architecture for its more intellectual qualities, buildings must be erected as occasion for 
 them arises; and so far it is independent of that sympathy or concern for them which 
 is requisite for almost the mere existence of the other fine arts. Yet, while such view 
 of the case virtually abandons the claims and pretensions of architecture as entitled to 
 rank with the latter, the same fact is accompanied by what is in itself an evil of no small 
 magnitude, inasmuch as it opposes that extensive reform which would advance the spread 
 of good taste, by removing at the same time all traces of a former bad one. However 
 unworthy they may be, buildings, when once erected, must remain for an indefinite time. 
 They cannot be put out of sight, like rubbishly pictures; they cannot be converted into 
 waste paper, like rubbishly books. A worthless school of literature, though ever so much 
 admired by one generation, may suddenly pass away, and be known to the next only as 
 
 b 
 
2 
 
 MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 a by-word of contempt and reproach. But the productions of those Laura Matildas 
 who work in brick and stone are not so cheaply got rid of. Neither do buildings admit 
 of after-revisals, and new editions ; so that unless corrected before theii completion, 
 whatever faults or mistakes may have been committed in them—be they ever so 
 egregious—are altogether past remedy; for it is not the fate of one building in a thousand 
 to undergo the process of such a thorough rifacciamento as the College of Surgeons.* On 
 the other hand, the productions of architecture cannot, like those of the other fine arts, be 
 multiplied at will, indefinitely, and so as to meet the demands of mere taste, but merely 
 in proportion to the actual necessity for them; whereas painting and sculpture may be 
 encouraged for their own sake, being exempt from that check upon supply which limits 
 it according to positive wants. Hence architecture is greatly more than any other of 
 the fine arts dependent upon casual circumstances and opportunities, almost beyond other 
 control than that of despotic power, which alone can create those great occasions which 
 the ordinary course of things do not provide; calling it into action for the sole purpose 
 of ministering to the taste or the pride of its patrons. 
 
 New or not, these considerations so far claim notice as they render it evident 
 how important it is that every occasion which presents itself for the exercise of 
 architecture in its higher capacity of a fine art, should be regarded as a precious, because 
 rare, opportunity, of which the utmost that possibly can be should be made. Otherwise, 
 instead of nothing, worse than nothing may be the result,—not success, but decided and 
 indelible failure,—or, at the best, something valueless as a work of art. 
 
 How far such is actually the case may be judged by looking at what has been 
 done within the last twenty or five-and-twenty years; and although among the buildings 
 erected within that period we meet with many of considerable merit, we also encounter 
 not a few that are quite the reverse;—certainly very far inferior to what they might 
 have been rendered by more diligent study and more artist-like treatment. The excuse 
 generally alleged is that the architect has been obliged to pay greater regard to economy 
 than any thing else. It may be so, yet even economy does not prevent the manifestation 
 of refined taste; still less does it demand the display of what is in poor if not absolutely 
 
 * Although scarcely any one, himself excepted, will attach any value to the opinions promulgated by Mr. A. 
 Bartholomew in his < Hints relative to the Construction of Fire-proof Buildings/ it may be mentioned that, as one 
 proof of the extreme degeneracy and degradation into which he contends architecture is now sunk in this country, 
 he considers the new fajade of the Surgeons’ College to be in every respect inferior to the first one !—the taste shown 
 in which would not have been at all creditable to, yet perhaps excusable in, a mere stone-mason. After this, should 
 any one obtain that writer’s approbation or good word, he will have reason to consider it as a most unfortunate 
 symptom, and to take himself to task very strictly in order to ascertain what can have excited such ominous 
 sympathy. 
 
MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 3 
 
 bad taste. In proportion as there is necessity for being sparing, is there also necessity 
 for taking care that there be no loss of attainable effect,—that nothing shall appear to 
 have been aimed at, than what has been done; and that, if possible, what has been done 
 should appear to be quite as much as ought to have been aimed at, or as the particular 
 subject itself would allow. 
 
 Undoubtedly there is room for congratulating ourselves on the advance which 
 architecture has made among us of late years, if we estimate by a comparison with the 
 immediately preceding period,—with that feeble, insipid, spiritless, negative school, when, 
 under the Taylors and Wyatts of the day, art enjoyed a comfortable sinecure, dozing 
 over designs that a tyro would now scarcely acknowledge. Yet, although we may be 
 allowed to take to ourselves the satisfaction to be derived from,, such contrast, by no 
 means ought we to turn our eyes aside from one of a different nature, but, however 
 unfavourable the answer is likely to be, to inquire if our recent architectural undertakings 
 at home will endure a comparison with the contemporary ones in other countries. If 
 they do not, hardly can it be attributed either to there not having been similar 
 opportunities, or to a deficiency of resources; nor are we at all inclined to impute it 
 to inferiority of talent. At the same time, adequate cause there must be some; one that 
 it might be a more delicate and invidious than difficult task to investigate. Until fairly 
 and fearlessly scrutinized and explained, it cannot very well be determined what better 
 course might be adopted so as to ensure results at least somewhat less disproportioned 
 to our apparently more abundant means. Should the obstacles which prevent us from 
 rivalling in the generality of our public structures those of other countries—some of 
 them very far less opulent than our own—be found insurmountable, it would be quite 
 unavailing to deplore them; and, perhaps, the wisest course, in such case, would be 
 quietly to resign pretensions which it is not in our power to support. That obstacles of 
 so serious a nature really exist, we do not affirm; but it is pretty evident that owing 
 to a combination of sinister and thwarting influences, architecture has been hindered 
 from putting forth its powers in this country on a scale commensurate with what several 
 of the respective occasions have demanded. Whether the majority of such unpropitious 
 influences be of a nature to defy remedy, remains to be proved by those who are 
 interested in throwing the blame entirely upon circumstances. It is not likely that all of 
 them defy remedy; yet neither is it likely that any will be remedied at all without 
 considerable exertion; or without energetic measures of perseverance in them on the part 
 of the profession itself. And as a stimulus to exertion for such purpose, it should be 
 borne in mind that the eyes of foreigners are upon us, who, while they contemplate 
 with astonishment of one kind our works of utility, our bridges, canals, tunnels, railroads, 
 and constructions of that class, generally regard with astonishment of a very different 
 kind those of our buildings, in which, if any where, grandeur and refined taste might be 
 
4 
 
 MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 expected to display themselves. Almost invariably do these latter present some drawback 
 or other, that ought never to have been suffered to take place,—something which leads 
 to a suspicion of there having been either very culpable mismanagement, or gross want 
 of judgment. 
 
 Although the detection of a malady does not necessarily ensure its cure, certain it 
 is that no cure will be thought of, nor can any proper remedy be devised, until the disease 
 is known to exist, and its precise nature has been ascertained. That architecture as a 
 practice and profession is not free from sundry evils and inconveniences may be taken 
 for granted, because many of those who follow it are loud in their complaints against 
 the defects of the prevailing system, more especially when they find the consequences 
 come home to themselves. Most conspicuous among them are those attending public 
 competitions, which are charged with being, for the most part, no better than plausible 
 delusions,—professedly for the purpose of eliciting talent, but so managed that talent 
 has scarcely any chance when pitted against influence and interest. It does not, however, 
 follow that the principle of public competition is bad or unsound in itself, because 
 frequently perverted from its real intent, and sometimes, by being grossly abused, rendered 
 quite inefficacious. The fact is, too much power is lodged with committees perfectly 
 irresponsible for either their proceedings or decisions, and probably consisting also of 
 individuals so utterly incompetent that their opinions would not for a moment be heeded 
 any where else. Consequently, supposing them to act with perfect sincerity, and to decide 
 according to the very best of their judgment, the result may be as unsatisfactory as if it 
 had been occasioned by sinister intrigue. In such cases, want of judgment may be quite 
 as mischievous as want of honesty. Besides which, it is not sufficient that men cannot 
 be convicted of having acted at all dishonourably: no room should be afforded even 
 for bare suspicion; but such precautions adopted that they must act honourably whether 
 they will or no, or else abide by the public disgrace that would attach to their conduct. 
 One sine qua non condition ought to be that there should be no secrecy; because if there 
 be no curtain at all, it is impossible for the evil-disposed to say that any thing improper 
 has been done behind it. 
 
 We do not take upon ourselves here to point out what are the precise measures and 
 regulations that could be adopted with the view of establishing the best attainable system 
 of architectural competition; further, than to mention that it has already been suggested 
 that, as initiatory to all proceedings on the part of the committee, there should be 
 a public exhibition of all the designs. And, indeed, the advantages which would ensue 
 from such publicity are so obvious that, unless it can be shown they would be counter¬ 
 balanced by new inconveniences, the rejection of a mode calculated to ensure them 
 would hardly tend to diminish what degree of mistrust may now prevail in regard to 
 
MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 competition. While a previous exhibition of the designs would be a guarantee against 
 undue favouritism, or intriguing of any sort, it would afford those who were eventually 
 to be the judges the means of sounding public opinion, and of correcting or confirming 
 their first impressions by repeated examinations; and so far would they be likely to be 
 saved from that precipitancy to which, no doubt, may be ascribed the errors of selection 
 so frequently occurring. 
 
 Another, not the least, although a contingent advantage, would be the beneficial 
 influence such exhibitions would have upon the public, who would thereby be led to take 
 a far livelier interest than they do at present in architectural matters; and who would 
 gradually acquire both a relish for the art, and some degree of judgment in respect to it, 
 if merely in consequence of the opinions and discussions that would be called forth. On 
 the other hand, the competitors themselves would feel an additional stimulus,—one that 
 would excite them to put forth cheerfully all their ability, since they would be aware that, 
 let them be unsuccessful as to the main object,—as of course all but one must be,—their 
 labour would not be wholly thrown away. At the same time, the encouragement thus 
 afforded would not call forth an inconvenient number of competitors, because publicity 
 would also operate as a check, deterring a great many who now send in competition 
 drawings from expending their time upon productions they would afterwards be ashamed 
 of acknowledging, and which, if noticed at all, would be noticed only for condemnation. 
 
 Readily may it be admitted that, taken as a body, the public are very ill-informed 
 in architecture, and that so far from being competent judges, they are scarcely able to 
 discriminate between talent and no talent. Yet their being ignorant at present is no 
 reason wherefore they should continue to be so. They must be taught; or if they cannot, 
 so much the worse for the profession; because, after all, it is the public who are then- 
 employers and patrons ; and surely the art is more likely to be advanced when encouraged 
 by the intelligent, than when dictated to by those who are capricious and obstinate in 
 proportion as they are tasteless and ignorant* It is little short of preposterous to tell 
 
 * The subjoined quotations, to which others might have been added, will serve to show that we are beginning 
 to find out what it is that is really wanting, and may be considered an indispensable pre-requisite before any 
 uniform and steady advance can be made in architectural taste. In fact, it is a cause that must be taken up 
 heartily both by the public and the profession: they must mutually enlighten and incite each other; and, so that 
 the proper impulse be but given, no matter with whom it originates. 
 
 “ Unless the means of patronage be accompanied by the judgment so necessary to give value to patronage, 
 the works of architects are never likely to reach above mediocrity.”—British and Foreign Review, No. 16 
 ‘ Public Monuments.’ 
 
 “ It has been much the fashion of late among the higher classes of society in this country, and the travelled 
 gentry, and the writers of travels, and the would-be critics in the political as well as literary periodicals, to 
 proclaim the supposed inferiority of British artists when compared to those of the Continent; and to complain 
 of a great lack of pre-eminent talent, particularly among the architects. This is a libel; and in my capacity of 
 
 C 
 
6 
 
 MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 people that they know nothing of architecture, and in the same breath call upon them to 
 encourage it. Why should they?—what rational motive or interest can they have for 
 so doing ? 
 
 Until the public have acquired some perception of architecture as a fine art, such 
 feeling for it as will enable them to enjoy it merely for the pleasurable sensations it excites 
 in the mind, they want only house-builders and upholsterers—people who can afford 
 them infinitely greater satisfaction than they can derive from contemplating the beauties of 
 architectural design, without reference to other enjoyment than what is so derived. It 
 may, perhaps, be the curse of art that it is dependent upon the public; that it flourishes 
 in proportion not only to the degree of talent existing among, its professors, but according 
 to the degree of taste or sensibility for it among other classes of the community: but so 
 it is. Unless there be minds capable of appreciating them, the Cartoons are little more 
 than so much old paper—the Elgin marbles, than so many decayed, rubbishly stones. 
 Without there be congenial minds—some kindred faculties in those around him—the artist, 
 let his particular calling be what it may, is forced to breathe in a withering atmosphere. 
 Genius may bud, yet it will be only to be blighted; and however fair may be the creations 
 of his fancy,—they may in themselves be a paradise,—yet it will be one of which only 
 irrational animals are the spectators. 
 
 This is, perhaps, considering the matter somewhat too curiously; nevertheless it is a 
 pregnant truth in itself—one which, however disagreeable may be the conviction that the 
 discussion of it might force upon us, ought to be fearlessly examined. It shall not, 
 however, detain us here, further than to remark that such as has just been alluded to is the 
 quasi condition of architecture among us. That it should be so may be unfortunate; that 
 it should not be otherwise is perfectly natural. How very small a fraction of the public,— 
 even of that class of the public which imagines itself initiated into the esoteric mysteries 
 of art,—are at all capable of appreciating the one in question, or have any sympathy with it, 
 either real or feigned, needs not to be told. If such state of things be inevitable, it must 
 be submitted to, and ought therefore to be submitted to quietly; since to complain of it 
 would be as irrational as it would be to lament that poppy-heads are not pine-apples. All 
 
 a humble admirer of the arts, who, after visiting all the capitals of Europe, and seeing all the galleries and 
 public monuments in it, have described many of the latter in two large works which have gone through more 
 than one edition, I hesitate not to declare that England, contrasted with other nations, lacks no pre-eminent 
 talent in the arts. But it lacks real encouragement; it lacks genuine patronage and fair play; it lacks enlightened 
 judges, and able as well as impartial critics; it lacks, above all, in those who rule or are invested with the 
 influence of patrons, or are deputed to direct the execution of great public works, that bold spirit of enterprise, 
 which, instead of suffering them to creep among puny imitations and diminutive undertakings, will lead them to 
 adopt lofty, grand, and original ideas.”—Dr. Granville’s Letter to the Duke of Wellington. 
 
MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 / 
 
 that in such case remains to be done, is to sit down philosophically and rejoice that matters 
 are not infinitely worse; because, whether the public care for architecture as a fine art, 
 or not, certain it is that they must have buildings, and accordingly must—pay for them. 
 Therefore, however bitter the pill may be itself, it has its gilding. 
 
 All art demands more or less of acquired taste; but in the case of architecture, more 
 especially, is such pre-requisite a sine qua non; for the obvious reason that, not being an 
 imitative art, the signs by which it appeals to the mind must be understood before it can 
 make itself intelligible. And unfortunately very little indeed has hitherto been attempted 
 towards inducing the public to contemplate it in its character of a fine art, and facilitating 
 their acquaintance with it as such, by drawing a broad distinction between its qualities 
 as a fine, or its processes as a merely technical and mechanical art. To a certain extent, 
 indeed, some knowledge of the latter is indispensable even in order properly to comprehend 
 its artistical powers: that is, such acquaintance with it as will enable a person fully to 
 comprehend all the technical modes of delineation, so as to be at no loss to understand all 
 that belongs to the external configuration and structure of an edifice,—both its general 
 forms and details, together with all circumstances of arrangement; and so as to foresee 
 from such drawings as plans and sections what a design will turn out to be when executed, 
 no less clearly than an architect himself. To attain even such degree of familiarity with 
 the subject,—which is after all but very limited and superficial in comparison with the drier 
 practical knowledge indispensable to the professional man,—to attain even this, will be 
 thought no inconsiderable labour,—a task little short of irksome. On the contrary, it is one 
 which would be found to be replete with great interest and amusement, provided, indeed, 
 a person has any capacity for it at all, and would take it up rationally, as he would any 
 other pursuit to which his taste might incline him. The chief obstacle in the way of its 
 being done is that no system of study accommodated to such purpose has hitherto been 
 laid down; so far from it that an liysteron-proteron is committed at the very outset; that 
 is, according to vulgar phrase, the cart is put before the horse, and the beginning made 
 at the wrong end; for instead of commencing with generalities and proceeding onwards 
 to specialities and minutiae, the latter are brought forward before the student has any clear 
 notion whatever of the subject in its leading bearings; which is not very much unlike 
 finishing up a single figure or object in a picture before any other part of it has begun 
 to be put in: a method suitable enough for a youth put into an architect’s office, where 
 he must learn his elements piece-meal, but as unfit for persons in general,—as tedious 
 and as repulsive as it would be to drudge through all the minutiae of a grammar in studying 
 a foreign language, before any insight had been obtained into its general structure and 
 character. 
 
 It is true, the mass even of the educated are at present totally ignorant of architecture; 
 
8 
 
 MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 yet, barring the prejudice which deters people from making the attempt, there is nothing 
 which would prevent those who have a turn for studies from becoming as proficient in 
 all that relates to the (esthetic part of architecture as the most accomplished architect 
 himself. Or if this view of the matter be denied,—if no diligence, no study, no enthusiasm 
 of feeling can ever place the amateur on the level of the professional man with regard 
 to taste,—the disastrous alternative is that it matters not how soon we abandon all idea of 
 advancing architecture as a fine art, seeing that it would be all to no purpose, no advantage 
 whatever—no accession of enjoyment resulting from it to the public. 
 
 Whatever views to the contrary may be held by some among the profession, certain 
 we are that no real friend, either to the profession or to the art, will advocate the 
 principle of mystifying that branch of architecture with which all ought, if possible, to be 
 conversant. No doubt shallow smatterers, superficial dabblers, half-educated pretenders, 
 ought to be exterminated; not, however, by interdicting them from meddling with 
 what they do not understand, but by encouraging them to proceed, and not to rest 
 
 content with stopping short at the threshold, where, as they are well aware, they are 
 
 at least one step in advance of the rest of the public, and therefore give themselves 
 airs accordingly. 
 
 It is not, indeed, proclaimed, verbis ipsissimis, that the public are not only ignorant 
 of architecture, but so stupid also that the attempt to enlighten them would be a hopeless 
 one; because the public would be likely to resent that as too barefaced an insult: yet 
 quite as much has certainly been insinuated before now. It seems, however, that the 
 eyes of the public are beginning to open by degrees: the times of mystery and craft are 
 
 gone by; and whether architects will aid that movement or not, the period is approaching 
 
 —very slowly at present, it must be confessed,—when their art will no longer be a 
 sealed-up book. Some among them will probably be disposed to exclaim with Garth’s 
 ‘ Envy ’— 
 
 “ If they should unmask our mystery. 
 
 Each nurse ere long will he as lcarn’d as we, 
 
 —Our Art exposed to every vulgar eye.” 
 
 Still those will only be the few the jealous and short-sighted: more liberal sentiments, 
 it is to be hoped, will prevail, even though it should be merely out of the policy which 
 dictates the making a virtue of a necessity. 
 
 As a beginning towards a better state of things than what now exists with regard 
 to architecture, towards one wherein a greater relish for the art, together with more 
 correct views will prevail,—the recent establishment of a lay Architectural Society at 
 Oxford may be considered as a good augury. It being yet quite in its infancy, we can 
 
MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 9 
 
 speak of it only as what has long been a desideratum, more especially as we are at 
 present unacquainted with the details of the scheme. In itself, perhaps, it may not prove 
 so efficient as could be wished; for experience shows that after the first stir is over, 
 and the delightful anticipation of the great things which are to be done has settled 
 down into the consciousness that next to nothing is actually being done, an apathetic 
 torpidity and drowsiness are apt to seize upon the members of such private Accademie. 
 Still the intent is laudable; and should this novel experiment prove in any degree 
 successful, similar societies will most probably be formed in other places. Should such 
 be the case, some knowledge of the art would be disseminated among the public; and 
 after what has already been urged on that head, it is unnecessary to say how desirable 
 we hold that to be. 
 
 It is not the least evil attendant upon the present insulated condition of architectural 
 study and knowledge, in consequence of their being confined almost exclusively to the 
 profession, that architects themselves do not take that enlightened view of their art which 
 they ought. As far, indeed, as the claiming for it almost paramount importance goes, 
 they cannot be charged with undervaluing it in the slightest degree; but that sort of 
 overrating it is altogether a different matter from endeavouring to ennoble it, and from 
 exerting themselves to make it manifest the powers ascribed to it. In their attention to 
 the means,—laudable enough in itself,—professional men overlook, or if they do not 
 overlook, apparently disregard, or are indifferent to the end,—that is, to what ought to 
 be the end proposed,—admitting that the work puts forth any pretensions on the score 
 of art. They are urged on by little or no stimulus from without their own pale; and it 
 might sometimes be imagined that they presume rather too much on the ignorance of all 
 the rest of the world. 
 
 Another disadvantage is, that for their judges they can look scarcely to any except 
 their professional brethren, perhaps rivals, whose praises will hardly ever be very 
 enthusiastic, and who will seldom be disposed to approve individually of what is either 
 contrary to their own practice, or calculated to render manifest their own inferiority. 
 Certain it is that the most promising talent in a young aspirant is seldom cordially hailed, 
 or in any way assisted onwards by those around him in the profession; neither does that 
 of the more advanced architect receive their applause until he has terminated or is about 
 to terminate his career; his contemporaries punctiliously waiting till he shall first have 
 said his valete. All this need excite no wonder: it would be more wonderful, every 
 thing considered, were it otherwise. Still it would be better were there some counter¬ 
 poise to it; which can be obtained only by there being, out of the pale of the profession, 
 a sufficiently numerous body competent to judge of merit and talent, and to discriminate 
 between those and the opposite qualities. Then, and hardly till then, will talent have 
 
 D 
 
10 
 
 MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 generally a chance of developing itself and making its way, without being dependent, as 
 it now is, almost entirely upon those fortunate casualties which enable it to surmount 
 the obstacles that else might have impeded its course for ever. 
 
 One most baleful circumstance has been that influence and interest are allowed to 
 have too great a sway. That such is the case, must long ago have been felt, though 
 never so openly complained of by architects themselves as has been done of late. The 
 opportunities for achievements in the higher sphere of the art, which present themselves 
 to the profession at large, are rare enough; but as far as individuals are concerned, 
 they are almost annihilated—reduced, at least, to barely possible contingencies. The 
 hope they hold out is a desperately forlorn one. Equally forlorn, too, in the opinion of 
 many, is the hope that any much better system can be devised, or rather, practically 
 enforced. There is among professional men considerable diversity of opinion with 
 regard to public competitions; and one (Mr. A. Bartholomew) has expressed himself most 
 decidedly hostile to the principle itself, no matter how competition may be conducted. 
 His arguments, however, if such they can be called, are exceedingly unsatisfactory, 
 and based upon nothing better than the assumption that the abuses which are known to 
 exist admit of no remedy.* That gentleman, however, stands almost alone in his open 
 hostility to competition; for although some others may be averse to it, they consider it 
 more discreet to dissemble their private sentiments. 
 
 Competition or monopoly, competition or favouritism: hardly is there any other 
 alternative with regard to works of that class, which afford an architect the opportunity 
 of signalizing himself. Of this the profession are well aware ; accordingly, instead of 
 proposing to abolish competition, the Institute appointed a committee for the purpose of 
 considering how the abuses attending it might be corrected, and what measures of reform 
 could be adopted; and the following extract from their Report shows that the committee 
 very plainly perceive the necessity for one measure, which would go nigh to establish 
 of itself not only a more honest, but a more efficient and salutary system. 
 
 “ They must advocate the principle that as much publicity as possible should be 
 given to the proceedings in all cases. For although the public at large cannot be 
 accepted as a competent judge upon cases requiring peculiar attention and information, 
 
 * He brings forward St. Paul’s as an instance of what has been effected without competition; but then 
 according to such argument, the New Palace ought to have been an equally fine architectural work of its kind; 
 whereas it may be suspected that had there been any competition, however limited, that edifice would have been 
 many degrees superior to what it now is. Supposing, for a moment, that favouritism had procured for a man of 
 inferior ability the building of St. Paul’s,—which might easily enough have happened,—the argument would have 
 been reversed. 
 
MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 1 1 
 
 yet the exhibition alone of the drawings, accompanied by the instructions upon which 
 they are founded, cannot fail to render those to whom judgment is confided both 
 diligent and scrupulous in the discharge of their duty. To effect this object, however, 
 experience has shown that the expression of public opinion must precede as well as 
 follow the decision of the judges.” 
 
 We do not take upon ourselves here formally to point out the other regulations 
 which, in addition to public pre-exhibitions of the designs, it might be requisite to establish 
 in competitions for buildings of any importance, further than to urge the necessity for 
 having a committee appointed at the outset, composed only of a few individuals, of 
 generally acknowledged competence for the office, and so far responsible as to be amenable 
 to public opinion for their decisions not only collectively as a body, but personally; the 
 votes, together with the specific reasons for assent or dissent, being recorded and reported. 
 Were such mode of proceeding once established,—and if perseveringly urged both by 
 the public and the profession, the demand could hardly be denied,—other reforms would 
 follow almost as matter of course. No longer would there be any suspicious secrecy; 
 the door would be shut against collusion and delusion; nor could there be that carelessness 
 and precipitancy of which now, it is to be feared, there is too much. 
 
 Some such course as that just pointed out, together with pre-exhibitions of the 
 designs,* would give us all the advantages of competitions without the mischiefs now 
 so loudly complained of. It would be unreasonable, however, to expect that we should 
 immediately obtain all the beneficial results that might rationally be anticipated from the 
 adoption of such a course. We should have put ourselves in the train towards a better 
 system, but time must be allowed for it to gather strength; nor would all the mischiefs 
 and prejudicial consequences of the present one be got rid of in a day. Not only days, 
 but years must pass away before the public could attain an adequate knowledge of 
 architecture, and a real taste for it. 
 
 If—though the If is almost superfluous—a singular deficiency of information at 
 present prevails with respect to architecture, all the greater necessity is there that it 
 should be remedied; for it is idle to expect that it can thrive steadily and vigorously 
 
 * Such exhibitions are, indeed, almost indispensably necessary for the assistance of the judges themselves; 
 for unless the drawings are hung up so that they may be reconnoitred and compared together, by being viewed 
 simultaneously, and that also promptly, it is almost impossible for them, however competent, diligent, and scrupulous 
 they may be, not to be perplexed and confused by passing in review a great number of designs; whereas by 
 adopting the mode suggested, they would not only have the means of sounding public opinion as a preliminary 
 step towards more deliberate examination of the plans, but of correcting or confirming their own first 
 impressions. 
 
12 
 
 MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 among us, so long as it shall be viewed in the light of a purely mechanical art, or little 
 
 better,_one which none but those who are professionally trained to it either can or 
 
 ought to aspire to understand. Before they can hope to obtain enlightened patronage • 
 from others, architects must first encourage other people to look upon architecture as a 
 liberal pursuit, replete with varied interest, and which, so far from being a barren study, 
 is one that when divested of pedantical prejudices, and applied to intelligently, tends 
 almost more than any other to develope and exercise the reasoning faculties upon abstract 
 questions of taste. Yet, whether there be any actual indisposition to do so or not, 
 certainly very little effort has been made by the profession to popularize a feeling for 
 their art, and to call it forth where it does not yet exist; but rather, it would seem, to 
 make it appear formidably difficult, dry, and repulsive. 
 
 One injurious consequence of this is, that in this country there is scarcely any demand 
 for architectural publications, except for such as are almost entirely practical, and promise 
 to be of immediate serviceableness. It is precisely works of that description, in which 
 architecture is regarded chiefly under its aspect of art, and as connected with taste 
 generally, that are least encouraged by the profession; notwithstanding they are those 
 which serve as a link bringing it and its interests into contact and alliance with other 
 branches of liberal study, literature not excluded. In proportion as it is itself so 
 distinguished from what is merely mechanical in its constitution, will the claims of those 
 who practise it, to be recognised as artists, be conceded to them by the rest of the 
 world. And, for the advancement of the art, it is of quite as much importance that the 
 public should not only admit but plainly discern the value of architecture, as that architects 
 themselves should think worthily of their own calling; yet scarcely can they be said to 
 do so, so long as they show themselves indifferent to the estimation in which it is held 
 by others, or are as well content with the stupid wonder of ignorance as with the 
 intelligent approbation of the better informed. 
 
 Let the real cause be what it may, certain it is that, notwithstanding the great 
 increase in the numbers of the profession, so far from there being any corresponding 
 increase in architectural publications of the description alluded to, there is rather a 
 diminution. It is true the continent supplies us with many, and among the rest with 
 some that ought to stimulate us to rivalry; for it does not reflect particular credit upon 
 this country that for works in that branch of art it should content itself with receiving 
 the products of foreign industry and enterprise, without contributing any thing in 
 return towards the common stock; except, indeed, it be such works as Roberts’s e Spanish 
 Sketches,’ and similar collections of lithography, which are rather pictorial than archi¬ 
 tectural studies; and which, besides, contain no account whatever of the buildings 
 represented in them. 
 
MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 13 
 
 “ It is a curious circumstance,” says Mr. Longueville Jones/' “ that great works of 
 this kind (Taylor and Nodier’s Voyage Pittoresque), the price of which is necessarily 
 large, meet with but few purchasers in England, though, to use a trade term, they are 
 admirably suited, by their subjects and execution, for the market; whereas in France, 
 where the wealth of the upper classes is much inferior to that of similar ranks in England, 
 important and expensive books are easily disposed of.” Still “curious” as it may be, it 
 is not at all surprising that such should be the case, because the ability to purchase, 
 without the disposition to do so, is not a whit of more avail than the inclination to do, 
 
 without the ability. It might have been imagined that such a body as the Institute of 
 
 Architects would ere now have done something, either directly or indirectly, to give fresh 
 impetus to this relaxed branch of architectural publication, and endeavoured to the utmost 
 of their means to diffuse among others that taste and information which, however much 
 they may be wanted elsewhere, they keep immured among themselves. 
 
 If they pursue such course with their eyes wide open to the consequences, 
 remonstrance or regret may be spared as altogether useless, it being morally certain 
 that let improvement come from what quarter it may, it will not take its rise among 
 those who may be considered the representatives of architecture and its interests. As far 
 as they are concerned, therefore, the only hope is that, strange as it may be, they have 
 
 confined their views to their own immediate circle, and quite overlooked those obstacles 
 
 which must be removed before their art can make any great advancement;—be either 
 put upon that footing, or brought into that condition, which it may be taken for granted 
 they wish it to be, simply because it is to their own interest that it should be;—not, 
 indeed, to the interest of every individual practitioner, but to that of the general body. 
 Should such be the case,—should they actually have overlooked so momentous a point, 
 or should they merely have abstained from bringing under notice a difficulty for which 
 they could devise no remedy,—apology need not be offered for having here pointed out 
 what well deserves their attentive consideration first, and their unremitted activity 
 afterwards. 
 
 To what, if not the indifference and incapacity of the public, is to be attributed the 
 mixture of meanness and absurd pretension which is allowed to disfigure many buildings 
 that might by different management have been rendered at least pleasing ? To what, if 
 not its wayward capriciousness, that sudden veering about, and abandoning one style 
 just at the point where we ought to carry it on and develope it more fully, in order to 
 take up another which may in its turn be dismissed as soon as the most obvious modes 
 of imitation it affords have been tried ? No sooner have we made some tolerable progress 
 
 * c Restoration of the Fine Arts of the Middle Ages in France,’—Foreign Quarterly Review, No. 43. 
 
14 
 
 MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 in Gothic architecture, than it is renounced either for impoverished copies of the first 
 rude attempts in it, or for tasteless mimicking of the most tasteless qualities of the 
 extravagant Elizabethan style. 
 
 After being studied with almost painful diligence, and gaining such footing among 
 us as to supersede every other columnar style, Grecian architecture is beginning to lose 
 our favour; and though there is no reason to apprehend that it will be entirely supplanted, 
 it must be content to forego its claim to supremacy, and consent to share its authority 
 with a rival. Little probability as there was some years back that such would be the 
 case, hardly will it, upon consideration, excite any very great surprise; for though it 
 might be laudable enough to begin by copying its ancient exemplars with scrupulous 
 exactness, it was no doubt an error to persist in that course, instead of endeavouring 
 to mould the style to our own purposes, and skilfully engraft upon it whatever else our 
 occasions call for beyond what it actually provides. This, it is unnecessary to observe, has 
 scarcely been attempted; for in that respect our latest efforts exhibit hardly any advance 
 on our earliest ones. Hence it need excite very little wonder if now, after the first 
 novelty is worn away, we begin to be weary of seeing the same ideas and forms constantly 
 repeated, almost to the exclusion of aught amounting to design. 
 
 Notwithstanding its exquisite beauties, it must be admitted that the Grecian style is 
 deficient in variety; yet, as if it was not sufficiently monotonous of itself, our practice has 
 been to render it more so by stereotyping columns and capitals,—contrary to the practice 
 of the Greeks themselves, who allowed considerable latitude in regard to matters of detail;— 
 while we have also rendered it quite cold and bare by dispensing with those embellishments 
 and sculptures which, though according to our notions mere ornamental accessories, 
 were precisely what gave not richness alone, but variety, meaning, and expression to 
 the individual building; such parts being, as it were, the picture itself, while all the rest 
 was to be considered as the frame-work to it: consequently, except that they are less 
 palpably absurd, empty pediments and blank friezes are very little better than empty 
 frames, when they occur in buildings which pique themselves upon being almost exact 
 copies of Athenian ones, which derived their individual character and effect quite as 
 much from the sculpture bestowed upon them as from their architecture. It is, besides, 
 any thing but a compliment to that refined taste and philosophic study of the art for 
 which we give the Greeks credit, to suppose that, if the mouldings and other strictly 
 architectural details be accurately copied, it is of little or no moment whether those 
 accessories which are quite superfluous to the building, as a building, be introduced or 
 omitted: for if every thing was, as we are assured, calculated for a certain given effect, 
 and studied with reference to one homogeneous whole, as a work of art, to retrench or 
 to expunge ornamental parts after so wholesale a manner is scarcely less than downright 
 
MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 15 
 
 mutilation. Such piece-meal copying of the separate parts is, most assuredly, a very 
 different thing from entering into the spirit of Grecian architecture; since the mechanical 
 literal exactness observable in some parts is frequently quite ridiculous, when contrasted 
 with the violent liberties and barbarous licenses which are allowed in the very same 
 work. To be sure, Doric and Ionic columns are Doric and Ionic columns still, let them 
 be tacked to what they may; nor, as such, can they be attacked or censured, seeing they 
 are fac-similes of warranted examples, as may at once be attested by our turning to 
 Stuart’s 4 Athens.’ Yet it is one proof, among others, of the exceedingly low and narrow 
 notions entertained with regard to architecture, when we find positive merit attributed 
 to such parts—in themselves rather the work of the stone-mason’s hands than of the 
 architect’s own ideas—without reference to their value in the composition,—to the taste 
 and happiness of effect with which they are applied; or, on the other hand, the total 
 want of propriety and feeling with which they are dragged in for the nonce where 
 they become impertinent expletives or even worse* 
 
 * “ The architect to whom architecture is not an art of imagination as well as an art of reason can never by 
 any possibility rise above the rank of an imitative builder. He may rear edifices of great strength, solidity, and 
 durability, very fitly arranged for the purposes for which they are built, and very correct in their architectural 
 details; but he will never be able to produce a structure in which novelty and originality are combined with the 
 other requisites of excellence; or, when placed in a situation where rules no longer apply, to rise superior to 
 obstacles which would be reckoned insurmountable by ordinary minds; and thus out of difficulties to ‘ start’ 
 beauties. This can be done alone by the architect of imagination; and it is only such an architect that is 
 entitled to be considered as an artist possessing the powers of invention or genius.” 
 
 It would not be amiss if this admirable passage (extracted from the first article in the 4th Number of the 
 Architectural Magazine) were hung up in every architect’s studio. “ It thus appears,” the writer, namely the 
 Editor himself, goes on to say, “that the more an amateur or architectural critic stores his mind with ideas on 
 architecture, the greater will be his enjoyment when examining architectural designs.” And this remark also 
 deserves to be carefully treasured up, if merely because it sets in a clear point of view the enjoyment architecture 
 holds out to those who cultivate it merely as an intellectual occupation; and further, the use that is to be made 
 of collections of designs, which are to be considered not merely as books of pattei'ns, to be consulted only for 
 immediate and specific purpose, but as studies, in the more comprehensive and liberal meaning of the term, 
 and as affording, though through a different medium, a similar, if not precisely the same employment to the 
 mind as actual buildings. It is true such delineations,—as those for instance in this volume,—cannot produce the 
 same impressions as the latter do; but can only suggest certain effects by showing what there is in the design 
 itself to produce them; yet then, on the other hand, they explain a very great deal that must else be but 
 imperfectly understood, or else is not to be ascertained without more or less trouble and inconvenience. After all, 
 their real serviceableness must depend upon the use that is actually made of them; because there is very little 
 either of profit or enjoyment in merely looking at drawings of this land; they require to be looked into, 
 examined, diligently read through, as it were, and the whole design investigated and considered in all its bearings. 
 To do all this may be thought very dull work; but it is still duller work to turn over a volume of architectural 
 plates without feeling the inclination to dwell upon any of their subjects. 
 
 Notwithstanding that this note has already grown to some length, we cannot forbear adding to it by 
 remarking that the publication from which the extract, here introduced, was taken, was one eminently calculated 
 to promote a taste for architecture, and to popularize the criticism belonging to it; as such, therefore, ought to 
 have been supported by the profession more warmly than it was; unless, indeed, they were really of opinion 
 that the public is already quite as much enlightened as they ought to he. 
 
16 
 
 MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 Ill the very face of authorities abundantly proving that the ancients treated their orders 
 as styles confined to no one positive standard, but admitting of considerable latitude both 
 in regard to proportions and details, the architect being left perfectly at liberty to exercise 
 his own discretion and taste in such matters, we adopted quite a different course, neither 
 availing ourselves of all the varieties of columns and pieces of detail which have been 
 discovered, nor venturing to deviate from any of them by carrying out any idea that 
 may have been suggested by them. While infinitely greater licenses are tolerated every 
 day, and to be met with in almost every one of our modern buildings in this style, such 
 deviation from actual precedent would be censured as most reprehensible—as a capricious 
 innovation of most dangerous tendency, no matter in what spirit or with what ability the 
 thing itself might be treated: for such is the unaccountable inconsistency which prevails 
 in matters of architectural taste, that though originality is loudly demanded, the door that 
 leads to it must on no account be suffered to be opened. By others, again, it has been said 
 that what specimens of the ancient orders we already possess and make use of are amply 
 sufficient for every purpose ; and yet, in contradiction to this declaration, architectural 
 travellers and antiquaries weary themselves in hunting after, and the public in describing, 
 every old stone that appears to be the fragment of a capital or entablature. Or, supposing 
 that in the course of time something of the kind should be brought to light, altogether 
 different from aught we are yet acquainted with, it would probably turn out to be nothing 
 more than what we might, without a very great effort or stretch of imagination, have hit 
 upon by ourselves, were it not that we make it a point of conscience to interdict the slightest 
 exercise of the inventive faculty : which, bv-the-by, seems to be one reason why we are just 
 now making the discovery that Grecian architecture, in spite of the unqualified eulogies 
 it has obtained, is exceedingly limited in its resources, and affords very little scope indeed 
 for design. 
 
 In one respect such complaint is not wholly without foundation for it; because it 
 must be acknowledged that when merely copied, the Grecian style affords precedent 
 for scarcely any thing beyond a portico or colonnade. Not only does it afford very 
 few examples of windows, but it almost resents the application of those few, except under 
 peculiar circumstances, and never to the extent to which such apertures are demanded 
 by the nature of our buildings, which not only require them continuously, but in different 
 stories. Hardly any skill, any degree of taste, any contrivance, can prevent such apertures 
 in a wall behind columns from producing a disagreeable effect,—one at any rate altogether 
 at variance with the original character and constitution of the style proposed to be 
 vigorously adhered to, as far as it admits of exact copying. Neither is it much better 
 when though there are no windows in the portico itself—they are freely admitted in 
 every other part; for in such case it is hardly possible to keep up any satisfactory 
 degree of unity and consistency throughout, but the portions of the facade on either 
 
MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 17 
 
 side of the centre will have the air of being distinct elevations, treated in an entirely 
 different mode. Therefore, unless it be very greatly modified, almost re-cast, as it were, 
 and moulded to a different system, Grecian architecture can rarely be applied with much 
 happiness of effect, except either the nature of the building be such as to require scarcely 
 any windows, but admits of being lighted from above; or else the plan can be so 
 arranged that the principal facade can be made on that side which would else be a 
 blank without windows; that is, when the facade can be a mere mask or screen, 
 allowing free scope for architectural decoration. 
 
 Exquisite as is the taste which characterizes Grecian design, the forms to which it 
 was applied are by far too few to meet the numerous and complex exigencies of the 
 art at the present day; besides which, simple as the application of the style appears 
 to be, and certainly is, if nothing more be required than to apply its mouldings and 
 transfer its ornaments to buildings quite differently constituted, it is by no means an 
 easy task, as experience must have convinced many ere now, to employ it successfully, 
 and so as not merely to avoid glaring inconsistencies, but so as to produce a work that 
 shall be of high and uniform quality throughout. To accomplish this is a very different 
 matter from producing a decent plagiary compilation; for, in addition to a well 
 cultivated taste, it demands no small portion of inventive power: to say the truth, it 
 requires nothing less than that the architect should be able to conceive his subject in 
 the spirit of an artist of antiquity, and afterwards mature and finish it up, furnishing to 
 it, from his own mind, all that is necessary for its completeness, but of which ancient 
 examples stop short. Those, therefore, who are anxious that Greek architecture should 
 retain its vogue among us, should aim at accomplishing this; if they cannot,—if, after so 
 long a trial of it, it be found utterly incapable of giving us any thing much better or 
 more consistent than has hitherto been produced, and that we have already exhausted 
 its powers of design and the combinations it admits of, they have no very great reason 
 to be surprised if it should now be laid aside for a style which not only readily adapts 
 itself to our mode of building, but derives much of its character and effect from 
 features for which ancient architecture makes no provision, or, rather, obstinately 
 rejects. 
 
 Accustomed to consider architectural style and character almost exclusively from a 
 single point of view,—that which takes cognizance chiefly of its elementary and component 
 forms,—we overlook other distinctions, at least do not take them sufficiently into account; 
 yet among them is a tolerably broad one, being nothing less than the difference between 
 buildings where no apertures were required for the admission of light, and those where 
 windows are not only indispensable, but occur in different stories, and must, except in 
 very rare cases, be so numerous as to influence the whole composition, and by the 
 
 F 
 
18 
 
 MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 space they occupy in it stamp it with a certain character, however much it may be at 
 variance with the expression professedly aimed at. Some, indeed, have thought to get 
 over the difficulty thus occasioned in a very summary way, by giving themselves no trouble 
 at all about it, but allowing windows, even of the very plainest description, perhaps 
 bare openings in the walls, to show themselves in fronts otherwise ostentatiously decked 
 out in what are thus reduced to the trappings of Grecian architecture. Hardly need it 
 be observed that this is utterly at variance with the very first principles of art; for it 
 is applying extraneous decoration before even the nudities are covered. Neither is it 
 any valid excuse to say that were a corresponding degree of decoration to be extended 
 to the windows, these latter would predominate too much, and interfere with the effect 
 of the columns; because the obvious reply is, if they are utterly irreconcilable, either 
 the windows must be got rid of, or the columns dismissed: in other words, whatever 
 may be the merits and beauties of the style considered absolutely, yet, if it neither 
 goes sufficiently far for the purpose required, nor can by any management be made 
 to do so, it ought not to be chosen at all, especially when there is one already provided 
 for us, one which assimilates with our ordinary mode of building, and one of which 
 very much more may be made than hitherto has been done. 
 
 What is generally understood in this country by the Italian style is little more than 
 one mode of it, namely, the Palladian, which, if not the most vicious and extravagant, 
 is almost the poorest and most insipid,—that wherein the orders and the application of 
 them are reduced to a convenient enough workman-like system, but are more or less 
 enfeebled in character, while the details are comparatively mean, and mannered also: to 
 say nothing of the glaring solecisms that are to be met with in the works of Palladio 
 himself,—such as windows in friezes, and sometimes cutting into the architrave like¬ 
 wise,—the mixture of apertures with and without dressings, not only in the same 
 composition, but in the same floor,—together with other palpable defects of that kind; 
 besides a certain disagreeable littleness owing to his elevations being cut up both 
 horizontally and vertically into too many divisions, and the uncouth taste displayed in the 
 attic with which they are frequently surmounted. 
 
 Palladio, says Hosking, “ made greater use of insulated columns than the Italian 
 architects generally, but his ordinances are deficient in every quality that produces 
 beauty: his porticoes may be Vitruvian, but they certainly are not classic. His columns 
 upon columns, his attached and clustered columns, his stilted post-like columns, his 
 broken entablatures, his numberless pilasters, straggling and unequal intercolumniations, 
 inappropriate and inelegant ornaments, circular pediments and the like, are blemishes 
 too numerous to be passed over because of occasional elegance of proportion, or beauty 
 of detail.” 
 
MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 19 
 
 Notwithstanding, however, that the epithet Palladian has been adopted as expressing 
 almost the quintessence of what is excellent in Italian architecture, it were an injustice 
 to the latter to estimate it as a style by Palladianism, which is only one, and if not 
 the very worst, by no means the very best branch of it; one, moreover, that in all 
 probability would never have obtained any thing like the vogue it has done, to the exclusion 
 of infinitely better models, were it not that the writings and published designs of that 
 master have been widely disseminated, together with his instructions, his principles, and 
 his taste, while models far more worthy of being studied have remained comparatively 
 unknown, for the reason that they have not been promulgated, to any extent at least, 
 in a similar form.* 
 
 Italian architecture comprises so many diversities that it is hardly possible to affix 
 to it any thing like a precise character, except by limiting it to a particular epoch or 
 school, or to one special class of buildings; and even then the exceptions may be more 
 numerous than the examples referred to as a standard. With many vices and defects, 
 it possesses many excellences and recommendations, and a variety of resources, which 
 render it capable of being turned to^ far greater account than hitherto has been 
 done. But if on the one hand it affords much scope to the architect, it calls on the 
 other for the exercise of discriminating taste; one that not only rejects what is positively 
 bad, but is capable of re-combining all the better elements of the style, so as to impart 
 to them originality and freshness, without forfeiting what is valuable in and characteristic 
 of the style itself; so that instead of appearing contrary to its genius, the novel forms 
 and effects that may be produced shall seem to be beauties, which have merely been 
 lying latent, and waiting for a discoverer to bring them to light. A style is to be 
 judged of, not only retrospectively by what it has produced, but prospectively also, 
 according to what it is capable of supplying. Nevertheless, so far from being at all 
 encouraged, such view of the subject is kept out of sight as much as possible; and 
 precedent is allowed to usurp such sway that any departure from it, no matter in what 
 spirit, is liable to be confounded with and reprobated as capricious innovation, although 
 the one proceeds quite in an opposite direction to the other. 
 
 Indiscriminate and exclusive admiration of any one style is more akin to blind and 
 
 * The influence of published designs, supposing them to be of a kind to carry with them any authority at 
 all, can hardly be questioned; because although the buildings themselves may be seen, it will seldom happen that 
 they can be sufficiently studied, certainly not referred to with the same facility as representations of them, which 
 can not only be studied, but consulted afresh whenever occasion for doing so may arise. Yet it is only of late 
 years that we have had such interesting and well executed collections of Italian architecture as Grandjean and 
 Famin’s ‘ Architecture Toscane,’ Percier and Fontaine’s c Palais, &c. de Rome,’ Letarouilly’s ‘ Edifices de Rome,’ 
 Gautier’s ‘Edifices of Genoa,’ Iiittorf and Zanth’s ‘Modern Architecture of Sicily,’ Cicognara’s ‘Fabbriche di 
 Venezia,’ &c.; or such monographs as Suys and Haudebourt’s ‘Palais Massimi.’ 
 
20 
 
 MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 ignorant prejudice than to real sympathy with it, and to enlightened taste. Besides, 
 
 after all, as much or even more depends upon the spirit with .which a style is treated, 
 
 than on what it is in itself; for as the noblest may be vulgarized, and be in course of 
 
 time corrupted by the very means resorted to in order to maintain it in its pristine 
 
 integrity, so may the poorest be aggrandized and elevated, if treated with maestria. 
 
 Architectural study requires the Janus-like power of looking both forwards and 
 backwards at the same time, and of foreseeing other modes of excellence and beauty 
 than what have already been attained. Something more than the mere vis inertia ;—than 
 the indolent and listless adherence to received examples and authorities—is required, in 
 order to maintain a style in its vigour; and without such vigour, purity is little better 
 than another name for lifeless imitation. Such remarks may appear quite uncalled for: 
 happy would it be for the art, could it be shown that they are altogether superfluous, 
 
 and no more than the iteration of what is familiar to every tyro, and evidenced by the 
 
 practice of every professor. Or it is possible that, if they cannot be charged with being 
 too common-place, they may be more heavily condemned as containing a highly in¬ 
 consistent doctrine, and which must therefore be made to appear equally extravagant 
 and dangerous. Let such be the case or not, they are at all events so far to the 
 purpose in this place, as what has just been said will serve to account for the degenerate 
 taste with which Italian architecture has, for the most part, been practised among ourselves, 
 owing to the authority which Palladio’s principles and works obtained, almost to the 
 utter exclusion of any attempt at that greatness of manner, and artist-like feeling, which 
 stamp the productions of such masters as Francesco di Giorgio, Baldassare Peruzzi, and 
 others; compared with which, those of the Palladian School have a certain disagreeable 
 
 dryness and littleness of character, partly occasioned by the want of freedom in detail, 
 
 and by insipid conventionalities; and partly by columns being employed obviously as 
 decoration alone, yet in such manner as to produce scarcely any effect of themselves, 
 while they prevent that which might otherwise have been obtained. 
 
 What recommends, or ought to recommend, the Italian style to us is, that although it 
 does not exclude, it does not call for the use of columns, in order to give it sufficient 
 expression and dignity; and farther, that it makes provision for all that can be required 
 with regard to windows; which are not only important as decorations, but admit of very 
 great variety, and may be made to accord with any degree of embellishment, from the 
 simplest to the richest and most elaborate,—from uniformity of character, kept up throughout 
 the whole of a composition, to piquant contrasts, arising from one or more differences in 
 the proportions and decorations of them in the same facade. Almost by means of these 
 alone may any one or more nuances be obtained; a circumstance of the utmost advantage 
 in buildings which, being enclosed by others, can present only a facade towards the 
 
MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 21 
 
 street, and that, moreover, limited to one general plane, and to nearly one uniform outline. 
 For such purpose, therefore, the astylar and fenestral* mode, which displays itself with 
 such maestria in the best works of the Italian school, offers resources which ancient 
 architecture does not merely not supply, but actually excludes; it being hardly possible 
 to reconcile the columnar with fenestral character; since at the best a certain tertkm quid 
 will be the result—an Italianized Grecian, or a Grecianized Italian design. 
 
 Two striking instances of the conflicting effect produced by bringing together 
 numerous windows and a predominant order of columns are furnished by the facades 
 of the Law Institution and the Royal Institution. The first of them exhibits a front 
 with windows placed behind an order forming a portico-facade, tetrastyle in antis, 
 crowned by a pediment; while the other is a poly-fenestral composition with three tiers 
 of windows inserted in the intercolumns of a lofty pseudo-colonnade of the Corinthian 
 order; compared with which the apertures themselves look petty as to size, and still 
 more insignificant as to character. 
 
 Undoubtedly if we are determined to abide by the examples of windows which 
 Italian architects have left us, neither rejecting any as unworthy of being authorities 
 for similar caprices, nor adding to the number by any inventions of our own, we incur 
 the danger of adopting many barbarous fancies, and also interdict ourselves from various 
 tasteful modifications and improvements. In the opinion of some, even such degree 
 of latitude in design may be considered reprehensible, because, after all, it leaves a 
 very great deal indeed to individual taste: yet, infinitely more deplorable would it be, 
 could taste be reduced to a matter of mechanical routine; and where, besides, would 
 be the merit of being right, if it were rendered utterly impossible for any one to go 
 wrong ? Fortunately, however, we are not bound so to confine ourselves to precedent, 
 as to have nothing more now left us to do than to copy what others have invented for 
 us. On the contrary, there is considerable scope for novelty of decoration, and a free 
 treatment of it—or what Germans would call freies walten —in respect to windows, 
 
 * If the two terms here employed have not yet been brought into use, they ought to be received as almost 
 indispensable to the nomenclature of architecture, which is in many respects exceedingly vague and indefinite, 
 as well as in other respects imperfect, although it would by no means be difficult to supply many of its present 
 deficiencies, so as to enable us to express with convenient brevity, yet perfect distinctness, numerous particulars 
 which it is now impossible so to describe. It would be more sensible to endeavour to frame new terms for such 
 purpose, than to cram soi-disant architectural dictionaries with barbarous obsolete words, of which the exact 
 meanings can seldom be now recovered, and which could not be brought again into use, even were they clearly 
 understood. Surely such a body as the Institute might plan and execute, without any extraordinary labour, a 
 far more complete and satisfactory work of the kind than can perhaps be expected from any individual: and it 
 certainly has the means of collecting, through its foreign members, accurate vocabularies of all the technical terms 
 of the art belonging to other European languages. 
 
 G 
 
22 
 
 MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 more particularly where the embellishment produced by them is not at all controlled 
 by a columnar ordinance; for it is not imperatively requisite that the architectural 
 border given to such apertures should invariably consist of members derived from 
 entablatures, or be restricted to nearly the same proportions. 
 
 Another source of variety in this style is that it allows the apertures to be closed 
 above either by an arch or horizontally; and, besides permitting both modes to be 
 adopted in the same design, admits of their being combined, the aperture itself being 
 square headed, but covered by an external arch; of which unusual mode the south or 
 garden front of the Travellers’ Club House offers us a strikingly happy application: 
 and one singularity attending it is, that the windows are here placed within arched 
 recesses whose reveals exhibit the returns or lateral faces of the pilasters from which 
 the archivolts spring. The soffit of the archivolts is likewise decorated by a guilloche, 
 as will be seen by referring to Plate 9, which fully shows all the details of those 
 windows, and the elaborate finish with which they are worked up. 
 
 Rusticating of different kinds contributes likewise in no small degree to variety 
 and character in this style. Contrary to the idea the term itself at first suggests, so far 
 from producing an air of rudeness, coarseness, or negligence, it is not incompatible either 
 with richness or delicacy of finish; or rather, accordingly as it is treated, and as the 
 subject itself may require, it is capable of great diversity of expression, from that of stern 
 massiveness to that of refined elegance. It is somewhat singular, therefore, that those 
 who have professed to be of the Italian school should have confined themselves nearly 
 to one single species of rusticating, and have made use of that mode only for basements. 
 
 Of late years it has been the practice to substitute for the more architectural form 
 of rusticating the insipid fashion of making merely horizontal grooves or joints; which, 
 instead of producing any richness of surface, or amounting to decoration, only occasions 
 an excessive monotony, arising from so many horizontal lines. In some cases it is 
 not otherwise of any moment than that the degree of effect, which might have been 
 attained, has been lost, there being nothing else in the designs themselves to be injured 
 by it; but this horizontal striping shows itself most flagrantly in the new Goldsmiths’ 
 Hall, where it renders the whole of the ground-floor utterly at variance with the rest 
 of the building, which is as remarkable for its heaviness, and the somewhat exaggerated 
 and outre character of its decoration, as the lower part is for its bareness, its tameness, 
 and its insipidity. The same disagreeable contradiction shows itself in the facade of 
 the City Club House, where a very mediocre and common-place specimen of Italian 
 architecture is placed upon a striped basement, to which we are not at all the better 
 reconciled on account of the contrast it presents to that of the Excise Office close 
 
MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 23 
 
 by it. Here then we have a direct proof, if there be any occasion for one, in confirmation 
 of what has previously been said, namely, that as much depends upon the feeling and 
 geniality with which the style made choice of is treated, as upon what it offers: which 
 remark will bear repetition, it being but too evident that the principle itself is very 
 rarely kept sight of. 
 
 There is no single distinctive mark which more forcibly characterizes the difference 
 between the Palladian school and that which preceded it, than the cornicione employed 
 by the older artists to crown their facades, and which of itself alone confers an imposing 
 dignity of aspect to a whole design, not otherwise attainable. Yet, although the effect 
 attending such a feature, and the fine examples of it presented by the Palazzi Strozzi, 
 Riccardi, Gondi, &c. at Florence, by the celebrated Farnese, and the Massimi at Rome, 
 and the Piccolomini at Sienna, were known to our travelled architects, they have never 
 found imitators in this country, where the comparatively dry and meagre Palladian 
 manner obtained almost exclusive preference, unless an exception was occasionally 
 admitted in favour of such barbarisms as Gibbs’s Church in the Strand. It was reserved 
 for Mr. Barry to introduce the cornicione here; and its value as an architectural feature 
 may be said to have been since admitted by acclamation: dissentients, perhaps, there 
 may be, but even those it may be suspected feel more than they care to acknowledge* It 
 is true, others might have done very long ago what has been done at last; but if, owing to 
 their want of taste, their inveterate prejudices, or any other cause, they neglected to do so, 
 that does not at all detract from the merit of accomplishing what was equally open to 
 others, however much we may be astonished at their extraordinary forbearance. 
 
 That the example thus set has not been lost upon us is tolerably evident; nor is it 
 likely to be deemed a very idle and groundless conjecture, if we attribute the growing 
 taste which has suddenly sprung up of late for this, to us, newer species of Italian archi¬ 
 tecture, to the manifestation of its character and power in this feature of it. In combination 
 with the richness of mouldings which gives to a faqade the same kind of relief the human 
 countenance derives from the locks that shadow it, the roof itself may be made to 
 conduce greatly towards both elegance and harmony of character, instead of being either 
 left a blemish to the whole design, or merely partially screened by a balustrade, which 
 
 * I have been given to understand that, in the opinions of some, I expressed myself in terms by far too 
 eulogistic with respect to the Travellers’ Club House in the Second Volume of the ‘Public Buildings of London.’ 
 But as I have not been enlightened by any criticism pointing out in what respect my commendations of the 
 design were erroneous, and required to be qualified and corrected accordingly, nor have since discovered any 
 reason to alter my first sentiments, I must be allowed to retain them, until some one shad be pleased to refute 
 distinctly what is said either in that work or the present one. The Plates here given will be of some ass,stance 
 towards such purpose, for they render almost every thing in the design sufficiently evident, whether it consists 
 of beauties or not. 
 
24 
 
 MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 indicates a terrace roof, and therefore becomes rather an incongruity when a sloping 
 one is detected behind it. 
 
 Were it the object of this Essay to institute a formal parallel between Grecian 
 and Italian architecture, and fully to compare the elements of each, it would be necessary 
 to enter into many other particulars, and to treat of those that have been brought forward 
 at much greater length; but our present aim extends no farther than to call attention 
 to the subject itself by some cursory hints. Nothing therefore is here said of the great 
 resources the Italian style derives from the employment of the arch, and the various 
 modes it offers of applying and decorating that feature, accordingly as it is supported 
 on columns or piers, is open or closed, used singly or continuously, and is either finished 
 with archivolts or has rusticated voussoirs. With arches may be classed niches, for 
 which features Grecian architecture of the classic period furnishes us with no authority. 
 These must be passed over without further notice; but we may be allowed to say a 
 few words relative to two other features of detail, merely because the building here 
 illustrated affords instances of them, namely, the ornamented string-course and rustic 
 quoins. 
 
 That the former of these, which is almost demanded by architectural propriety as 
 indicating the internal division into separate floors, admits of great delicacy as well as 
 richness, will hardly be questioned after the application which has been made of it in 
 the street front of the Travellers’ Club House, (see its details in Plate 8) : as little too 
 can it be doubted that it affords scope for much invention and variety. It is, besides, 
 quite distinct in its character from the superior cornice; and instead of at all interfering 
 with it, or being a representation of it, on a lesser scale, serves rather to give additional 
 value to that feature. An analogous but considerably more extended mode of decoration, 
 employed to mark the different stories of a building, occurs in many non-Palladian 
 Italian examples—if it be allowable to coin such a distinctive term—where an enriched 
 frieze forms the parapet to the windows or galleries on the several floors, as in the 
 cortiles of the Palazzi Riccardi and Bartolini; and as is likewise the case in the exterior 
 facade of the Palazzo Guadagni,—the design of which is however, in other respects, by 
 no means in the very best taste. 
 
 Although not at all likely to be approved of, even if tolerated, by those who are 
 exclusively devoted to Grecian architecture, rustic quoins are not without their propriety 
 in this style. Most certainly they cannot be objected to as unmeaning, because they 
 clearly express strength where it is important that it should be indicated, namely, at 
 the angles of the structure; besides which, they announce that the design is complete, 
 whereas if, as is too frequently the case, there is nothing of any kind to indicate a 
 
MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 25 
 
 proper termination, a building looks as if it had been discontinued before it had reached 
 the extent intended to be given to it. 
 
 A more tasteful exemplification of astylar Italian architecture than is the production 
 of Mr. Barry’s here delineated is not to be met with in this country; at least we know 
 of none equally beautiful: and if it be objected that it is after all inconsiderable in point 
 of size, we reply, that so much the more credit is due to the architect who has displayed 
 so much in a comparatively limited space, while so many others, who have had a much 
 wider field to work upon, have not produced any thing at all approaching to it. 
 
 The general idea, or motif, as the French express it, of the Pall-Mall front, appears 
 to be derived from that of the Palazzo Pandolfini at Florence, the design of which is 
 attributed to Raphael. Instead, however, of at all derogating from the originality of 
 the English building, the resemblance that may be traced between the two serves only 
 to show how much the beauties of a model may be improved upon by a free imitation 
 of it in the hands of a master. There is a sveltezza in the English Palazzo, which the 
 Italian one does not possess, and more variety in its individual features; it has also more 
 unity of character. It is free from that heaviness in its general proportions, and from 
 dryness of style in the details, which mark its archetype; and it further derives no small 
 degree of additional elegance from the terrace-like screen to the area, which converts 
 into a positive beauty—a graceful as well as a picturesque accompaniment—what is 
 almost invariably allowed to be more or less a blemish. 
 
 While it accords so perfectly with the other in its taste that it would be impossible 
 not to recognise it immediately as the production of the same mind, even were it not 
 known that the two elevations belong to the same building, the garden faqade bears the 
 impress of greater originality. The piquant effect produced by grouping together the 
 three centre windows of each floor is as happy as it is unusual: this composition has an 
 indefinable charm, an attractive non so che of sentiment infinitely more captivating than 
 that mere pomp of architecture which is frequently to be met with in designs that 
 nevertheless betray complete inanity of ideas. Those who may be so disposed are at 
 liberty to say that there is not much in it after all,—merely a few windows and rustics, 
 and some other members of detail; in short, nothing more than what any one else might 
 have done. Very true: but then, how are we to dispose of the untoward question, Why 
 have they not done so? Why should they,—those at least who have practised the 
 Italian style,—have forborne to avail themselves of it to the extent we now perceive it was 
 possible for them to have done, had they been capable of bringing to it that geniality 
 of feeling and taste, without which a work of architecture can never be a work of art, 
 except of art at second-hand; whatever it may be as a production of manual labour and 
 
 H 
 
MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 26 
 
 mechanical skill ? Those who affect to disparage the assthetic beauties of a fine and masterly 
 composition by saying, that after all they are only matters of taste, might as well explain 
 what it is that deters them from making use of that Only, which we must suppose it is 
 so exceedingly easy for them to accomplish, did they but care to do so. The truth is, 
 in such Only lies precisely the great difficulty of art, for all the rest may be accomplished 
 by diligence and perseverance. 
 
 Without repeating here what has already been said by the writer on the subject of 
 the Travellers’ Club House in another work,* it may be remarked, that one quality in 
 which this building is pre-eminent, and at present stands almost alone, is the perfect 
 finish bestowed on every part. There is not a single member, let its situation be what it may, 
 which is not most carefully studied and worked up, as will be evident on examining the 
 plates of details; and, unless they are carefully looked at, the merit of the elevations, 
 particularly of that of the garden front, cannot be fully appreciated in all their particulars. 
 This quality of finish can hardly be too strongly insisted upon, because it is precisely the 
 very one of which we are apt to be careless. Hence the almost inexcusable inequalities 
 which offend the eye in so many structures otherwise not devoid of merit: paltry and 
 misplaced economy in one part is suffered to interfere with the embellishment bestowed 
 on others, and which is thereby sometimes rendered little better than trumpery and 
 misplaced ostentation. No doubt some parts of a composition, particularly where the 
 design is of considerable extent, ought to be treated as subordinate to' others; but that is 
 a very different thing from neglecting them, because the last serves only to render them 
 all the more conspicuous and obtrusive as blemishes and scars in the design; whereas 
 careful finish would have brought them into proper keeping with the rest. Even the 
 architect of Somerset House does not appear to have fully understood the importance of 
 this principle, or, if he did, disregarded it; for notwithstanding that there is considerable 
 merit in many of the individual parts of that pile of building, there are others which 
 gieatly impair its general character, throwing the ensemble out of keeping, and producing 
 contrasts of the most disagreeable kind. Other instances of disregard to finish and unity 
 of character have already been brought forward; although merely as such there would 
 be no occasion to particularize them, because inattention to finish, and to the keeping 
 resulting from it, may be said to constitute the rule, while due attention to it forms 
 merely the exception. 
 
 As the elevations relieve us from the task of describing the exterior of this Club 
 House, so do the plans and sections excuse us from repeating what is far more 
 clearly expressed by them than can be done in words. All, therefore, that we shall do 
 
 * See ‘ Illustrations of the Public Buildings of London.’ Vol. ii. page 260. 
 
MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 2 7 
 
 is to direct attention to circumstances which might else not be taken sufficiently into 
 account by every one; by some be, perhaps, quite overlooked. One very great merit 
 of the plan is, that while no more space than is absolutely requisite is given up to the 
 Hall, so far from the entrance appearing confined as to size, or at all deficient in 
 importance and character, it is on the contrary attended with the most striking effect, 
 and that too of an unusual kind, owing to the vista produced through and beyond that 
 corridor, by glazed folding-doors into the lobby or lower part of the principal staircase ; and 
 the perspective thus produced is greatly assisted both by the difference of level between the 
 Hall and Corridor, by the intervening compartment opening into the lobby to the Morning- 
 room, and by the happily varied play of light and shade. In fact, we find here a picturesque 
 idea, recalling to mind at once the cortile of an Italian palazzo: the motif is the same; 
 and the difference of character chiefly incidental, owing to the arcade being enclosed by 
 windows instead of being open to the Court, which is here of necessity sunk to the level of 
 the basement floor. How much the Court itself is made to contribute to the completeness 
 of the picture may be imagined from the elevation of one of its sides, shown in the 
 section (Plate 5). Nothing is suffered to mar the effect;—no beggarly paltriness from 
 without to dispel the charm of the scene within. Yet, while every thing seems to have 
 been studied chiefly for effect, so far from any thing having been sacrificed on the 
 part of convenience, this very disposition is made to contribute to it materially, at 
 the same time that greater privacy is secured than where the doors of the principal 
 apartments, and perhaps the staircase itself, are exposed to view on immediately entering 
 from the street. Whatever the first impression may be in such case, nothing is left to 
 the imagination; besides which, a spacious hall tends to lessen, if not always to overpower, 
 the effect of the other rooms. Here, on the contrary, the idea of a spacious interior is 
 at once conveyed to the mind, but it is that of extent in the depth of the plan, and the 
 distance to which the staircase and the parts beyond it are removed from the entrance; 
 whereas, were the situation of the staircase reversed and placed on the north instead of 
 the south side of the Court, though it might be a matter of indifference in all other 
 respects, such alteration would be materially for the worse in regard to the points just 
 noticed, inasmuch as the staircase would be reached almost immediately on ascending the 
 steps from the Hall, and the plan appear in consequence much abridged; notwithstanding 
 that the Coffee-room would remain as far off as before. 
 
 With regard to the staircase it appears far more spacious and important in reality than 
 it does in either of the sections, which show only its breadth, and exhibit it besides in other 
 respects rather disadvantageously; for other reasons, because the greater expanse above 
 (owing to the greater space gained on the upper floor, as is shown in the plan, Plate 2,) 
 is not expressed, as would be done by a longitudinal section of that part of the building, 
 from east to west, or better still, by a perspective view. It is necessary farther to explain 
 
28 
 
 MODERN ENGLISH ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 that the arch facing the foot of the staircase is filled in with mirror; which produces a 
 very picturesque effect, and also an artificial symmetry to the plan, by presenting the 
 view of a corresponding space seen through an open arch. 
 
 Should these remarks be considered more minute than there is occasion for their 
 being, they will doubtless be censured also as prolix and tedious; therefore, if only to 
 escape such reproach, we shall be much more concise in our observations with regard to 
 the apartments themselves. Those on the ground floor call for no remark, and all that 
 it is necessary to say concerning the Drawing and Card-rooms, whose architectural details 
 are described in Plate 10, is that they are fitted up and furnished in a style of quiet 
 elegance, and are at once sober and cheerful in character. The doors and styles of the 
 panels on the walls are tastefully painted and highly varnished in imitation of bird’s-eye 
 maple, and the panels themselves painted to resemble gilt leather of a flowered pattern 
 on a white ground, and relieved by a plain gilt moulding. The columns and every other 
 part of the Library are painted of a wainscot or pale oak colour, except the chimney-piece 
 on the side facing the windows, which is distinguished from the other two, both by being 
 larger, and by being of a very dark oak hue. In the centre of the ceiling of each of 
 the compartments, into -which the room is divided, is a square panel, with ornamental 
 open work, serving as a ventilator. Besides the rooms on this floor, there are two 
 others higher up, the staircase to which is shown in Plate 2. The larger of these, which 
 corresponds in size though not in height with the House Dining-room on the ground floor, 
 and is above the small rooms over it, in the other plan, is the Billiard-room; it is lighted 
 from a lantern in the ceiling, and the upper part of the walls -is lined with casts from 
 the Elgin marbles, which form a deep bas-relief frieze quite around the room. The 
 other, which is the Smoking-room, and is much smaller, comes over the staircase, as 
 is shown in section (Plate 5), which describes the curve of the awning before the 
 windows, and forming a kind of viranda. The room itself has something of tent¬ 
 like character, both owing to the form of the ceiling, and to that of the walls being 
 painted in imitation of cloth or linen with broad stripes. 
 
 It was long the reproach of the British capital that it had scarcely any buildings 
 of the class of the palazzi of Italian cities; but this is now in some degree removed 
 by the facades of our modern Club Houses ; nor among those hitherto erected is there 
 one more fraught with souvenirs of Italy, and of what is most tasteful in its archi¬ 
 tecture, than the Travellers’, respecting which, the following historical notice may very 
 properly be here introduced, as supplementary to the architectural notice of the 
 building. 
 
Cijc Crabellers’ Club 
 
 The Club originated in 1819, when it was instituted by a few noble and distinguished Travellers and 
 Diplomatists, and the first Committee, formed in May of that year, consisted of the following Noblemen and 
 Gentlemen: 
 
 The Earl op Aberdeen. 
 
 The Earl of Ancram. 
 
 Lord Auckland. 
 
 Earl Beauchamp. 
 
 Henry Bonar, Esq. 
 
 Hon. Robert Clive. 
 
 C. R. Cockerell, Esq. 
 
 The Earl of Dartmouth. 
 
 W. R. Hamilton, Esq. 
 
 Robert Hay, Esq. 
 
 Sir Tyrwhitt Jones, Bart. 
 The Marquess of Lansdowne. 
 
 Lieutenant-Colonel Leake. 
 
 Thomas Legh, Esq. 
 
 Hon. Archibald Macdonald. 
 
 C. A. Mackenzie, Esq. 
 
 T. B. S. Morritt, Esq. 
 
 Sir Gore Ouseley, Bart. 
 
 Viscount Palmerston. 
 Major-General Ramsay. 
 Lieutenant-Colonel Shawe. 
 Lieutenant-Colonel Stanhope. 
 
 Hon. Capt. Granville Waldegrave. 
 Edward Bootle Wilbraham, Esq. 
 
 The object of the Club was to form a point of re-union for gentlemen who had travelled abroad; and to 
 afford them the opportunity of inviting, as Honorary Visitors, the principal members of all the foreign missions and 
 travellers of distinction. It was first located at a house in Waterloo Place, which has since proved a nursery for 
 clubs, and the number of members was limited to Four Hundred, but it soon became such a distinguished favourite, 
 and the applications of candidates were so numerous, that it was extended to Five Hundred, and then to Six 
 Hundred Members. Accordingly, in 1821, the removal to a larger and more commodious house became necessary 
 by the sixth rule of the Club; and, in unison with the spirit of its establishment, no person was eligible as a 
 member “who had not travelled out of the British Islands to a distance of at least five hundred miles from 
 London in a direct line,”—a qualification then much more rare than in these days of facilitated locomotion. 
 
 The Club continued to increase, and the accommodations of the house not being adequate to the number 
 of its frequenters, at the close of 1827 a site was procured at the east end of Pall Mall, and it was resolved 
 to build a new Club-House. The necessary funds being raised, and designs having been procured from several 
 architects of distinguished talents, that furnished by Mr. Barry, for the present structure, was selected. The 
 contract for the building was taken by Messrs. Lees at about £19,000, and it was commenced early in 1830, and 
 finished in the beginning of the year 1832 ; the whole cost, exclusive of fittings and furniture, being £23,160; 
 and including the latter, £29,557- 16s. It is found to be admirably adapted for its intended purpose, and the 
 execution of the work highly creditable to the builders. The present number of Members of the Club is Seven 
 Hundred, exclusive of Fifty Life Members who have compounded for their subscriptions, and who are not to 
 be replaced. 
 
 The rules of the Club are as follow: 
 
 1. That the Club consist of Seven Hundred Members. 
 
 2. That the sum of Thirty Guineas shall be paid by each Member on his Admission; in which sum is 
 included his Subscription for the current year. 
 
 3. That each subsequent Annual Subscription shall be Ten Guineas, due on the 1st of January in each year; 
 and if not paid before the 1st day of May, the defaulter will cease to be a Member of the Club. 
 
 4. That if any person whose name has been so struck out from the list of Members, on account of the 
 non-payment of his subscription for the current year, shall have been out of the United Kingdom during the whole 
 of the preceding four months, he shall, on payment of his arrears, be re-admitted without ballot; and in the event of 
 the number of the Club being complete, he may continue a supernumerary Member till a vacancy occurs; but no 
 
30 
 
 THE TRAVELLERS’ CLUB. 
 
 arrears shall be demanded for any year during the whole of which any Member shall have been absent from the 
 United Kingdom. 
 
 5. That Members, on their return from abroad, and payment of their Subscriptions for the current year, become 
 supernumerary Members till vacancies occur; but if their Subscriptions are not paid within six months after their 
 return, they will be considered as no longer Members of the Club. 
 
 6. That no person be considered eligible to the Travellers’ Club who shall not have travelled out of the British 
 Islands to a distance of at least five hundred miles from London in a direct line. 
 
 7. That Foreign Ambassadors and Ministers resident in London may be nominated by the Committee 
 Honorary Members of the Club during their respective missions. 
 
 8. That the Committee may invite Foreigners of distinction to the Club as Visitors, for any period not 
 exceeding six months at a time, on the recommendation in writing of any two Members of the Club. 
 
 9. That the Committee may in the same manner invite as Visitors to the Club, for any period not exceeding 
 one month at a time, British Travellers of distinction, whose usual place of residence is at a distance from the 
 Metropolis. 
 
 10. That no dice, and no game of hazard, be allowed in the rooms of the Club, nor any higher stake than 
 guinea points, and that no cards be introduced before dinner. 
 
 11. That the Club-house be open from nine o’clock a.m. till two o’clock a.m. 
 
 12. That the regulations for dinner, refreshments, and other details of conducting the establishment, be vested 
 in the Committee; but that any alteration in the number of Members or standing rules of the Club, be decided 
 by a majority at a general meeting, at which at least forty Members must be present, to be summoned by the 
 Committee for that purpose; giving at least fourteen days’ notice. 
 
 13. That the Committee do consist of twenty-five persons, including the five Trustees and Treasurer, who are 
 permanent Members, six of the nineteen others to go out by rotation every year, not re-eligible till after the 
 lapse of one year. 
 
 14. That in order to replace the six Members of the Committee who go out annually, the Committee shall 
 meet one week at least before the first general meeting, and name twenty-four Members of the Club, not being 
 then Members of the Committee, out of which six shall be elected by ballot at the general meeting. The List 
 of the twenty-four Members so named to be placed in the rooms of the Club for at least one week previous to 
 the first general meeting. 
 
 15. That in case of the death or resignation of one or more Members of the Committee, the vacancy so 
 created to be filled up at the time by the Committee, from the list proposed at the last general meeting. 
 
 16. That Three of the Committee do form a quorum. 
 
 17. That the following be the form of recommendation of Candidates for admission into the Club :— 
 
 “ A. j B. being desirous of becoming u Member of The Travellers’ Club, and being qualified for the same 
 “ by having visited • and and we, the undersigned, 
 
 “ do, from our personal knowledge, recommend him to that honour .” 
 
 18. That each candidate be proposed and seconded, and that one week’s notice be given of the commencement 
 of the ballot in each year. 
 
 19. That the ballot shall take place every evening between eleven and twelve, during the sitting of 
 Parliament. 
 
 20. When twelve and under eighteen Members are present, and balloting, one black ball, if repeated, shall 
 exclude; if eighteen and upwards are balloting, two black balls shall exclude, and the ballot shall not be repeated. 
 
 21. No ballot can take place, under any circumstances, unless twelve Members are present. 
 
 22. That in case the subscription and admission money shall not be paid by any new Member, if in England, 
 within one month after his election, or if abroad, within one month after his return, such person shall not be 
 considered as a Member of the Club. 
 
 23. That there shall be two meetings of the Club held yearly, one on the first Monday in May, for the purpose 
 of electing six new Members of the Committee for the succeeding year, and receiving a report and abstract of 
 the state of the accounts and general concerns of the Club for the past year from the Committee, together with an 
 estimate of the receipts and disbursements of the current year, which report and estimate shall be printed, in the 
 course of the following week, for the use of the Members; the other meeting shall be held on that day fortnight, 
 for the purpose of deciding on such propositions as may have been submitted on the preceding general meeting, 
 and the chair will be taken, at all annual and extraordinary general meetings, at three o’clock; but that it shall 
 not be considered a general meeting of the Club unless at least ten Members are present. 
 
 24. That at all general meetings of the Club, the votes of the meeting shall be first taken by show of 
 hands or division, provided there be forty Members present, the majority to decide; but if a ballot be demanded 
 
THE TRAVELLERS’ 
 
 CLUB. 
 
 31 
 
 by six Members present, the proposition in debate shall be postponed until the following day, when the ballot 
 shall be taken between the hours of three and six o’clock; or if forty Members shall not be present, the 
 proposition shall be decided the same day by ballot, between the time of the adjournment of the Members and 
 six o’clock. In all cases of ballot two-thirds of the Members voting to decide. 
 
 25. That during the months of February, March, April, May, and June, the Committee may be required to 
 summon a general meeting, by any twenty Members of the Club expressing their wish to that effect in writing to 
 the Secretary, and stating the nature of the propositions to be brought forward; such meeting to be summoned 
 within three weeks of the receipt of the requisition by the Committee. 
 
 26. That no proposition affecting the general interests of the Club shall be brought forward at any general 
 meeting, without a week’s notice in writing, signed by six Members, and communicated to the Secretary, and 
 placed by him in the room. 
 
 27. That no dog be admitted into any of the rooms of the Club. 
 
 S. W. SINGER, Secretary. 
 
 COMMITTEE.—1839. 
 
 Earl op Aberdeen, . . Trustee. 
 
 Lord Auckland, . . . Trustee. 
 Thomas Baring, Esq. M.P. 
 
 Hon. Sir Edward Cust. 
 
 Edward Drummond, Esq. 
 
 Lord Eliot. 
 
 Colonel Ellison. 
 
 Colonel Fox. 
 
 Capt. Fremantle, R.N. 
 
 Bartholomew Frere, Esq. 
 
 Capt. Hon. Frederick Grey. 
 
 William R. Hamilton, Esq. . Ti'ustee. 
 Colonel Lambert. 
 
 The Marquess of Lansdowne, Trustee. 
 
 S. G. Lushington, Esq. 
 
 E. Marjoribanks, Esq., Trustee and Treasurer 
 Capt. Meynell, R.N. 
 
 Colonel Moore. 
 
 Frederick Pigou, Esq. 
 
 Earl op Sandwich. 
 
 Lord Skelmersdale, . . Trustee. 
 
 George Tierney, Esq. 
 
 George Vivian, Esq. 
 
 C. Baring Wall, Esq. M.P. 
 
 T. L. Ward, Esq. 
 
 MEMBERS. 
 
 Ralph Abercromby, Esq. 
 Marquess of Abercorn. 
 
 Earl of Aberdeen. 
 
 Earl of Aboyne. 
 
 Lord Acheson, M.P. 
 
 Sir Thomas Dyke Acland, Bart. M.P. 
 Thomas Dyke Acland, Esq. 
 
 Captain A’Court, R.N., M.P. 
 Marquess of Ailesbury. 
 
 Viscount Alexander. 
 
 Caledon Alexander, Esq. 
 
 James Alexander, Esq. 
 
 Henry Alexander, Esq. 
 
 William J. Alexander, Esq. 
 
 Viscount Alford, M.P. 
 
 Lord Alvanley. 
 
 Lieut.-Colonel John W. Angerstein. 
 John Angerstein, Esq. 
 
 William Angerstein, Esq. 
 
 Hon. Colonel Anson, M.P. 
 
 George Edward Anson, Esq. 
 
 Sir R. A. Anstruther, Bart. 
 
 Sir Edmund Antrobus, Bart. 
 
 Gibbs Crawford Antrobus, Esq. 
 
 Major-General Sir T. Arbuthnot. 
 Andrew Arcedeckne, Esq. 
 
 Robert Arnold, Esq. 
 
 Earl of Arran. 
 
 Earl of Ashburnham. 
 
 Hon. Percy Ashburnham. 
 
 Lieut.-Col. Hon. Thomas Ashburnham. 
 Hon. Charles Ashburnham. 
 
 Lord Ashburton. 
 
 Hon. John Ashley. 
 
 Arthur Aston, Esq. 
 
 Lord Auckland. 
 
 George William Aylmer, Esq. 
 
 John Backhouse, Esq. 
 
 William Bagot, Esq. 
 
 Hon. William Bagot, M.P. 
 
 Captain Edward Bagot. 
 
 Captain Charles Bagot. 
 
 Captain Henry Bagot, R.N. 
 
 Rev. Lewis Bagot. 
 
 Colonel Hugh Baillie, M.P. 
 
 James Evan Baillie, Esq. 
 
 Alexander Baillie, Esq. 
 
 David Baillie, Esq. 
 
 Henry James Baillie, Esq. 
 
 Anthony St. John Baker, Esq. 
 Edward Baker, Esq. 
 
 Blayney Balfour, Esq. 
 
 Captain John Balfour. 
 
 James Bandinel, Esq. 
 
 C. Bankhead, Esq. 
 
 William John Bankes, Esq. 
 
 David Barclay, Esq. 
 
 John Barham, Esq. M.P. 
 
 Hon. William Bingham Baring, M.P. 
 Henry Baring, Esq. 
 
 Right Hon. Henry Baring, M.P. 
 Hon. Francis Baring, M.P. 
 
 Thomas Baring, Esq. 
 
 Rev. Frederick Baring. 
 
 Samuel Barrett, Esq. 
 
 Viscount Barrington. 
 
 Hon. Augustus Barrington. 
 
 Charles Barry, Esq. 
 
 Sir Frederick Hervey Bathurst, Bart. 
 Francis Beckford, Esq. 
 
 William Beckford, Esq. 
 
32 
 
 Earl of Belmore. 
 
 Lord William Bentinck, M.P. 
 
 Lord Henry Bentinck. 
 
 George Bentinck, Esq. 
 
 Richard Berens, Esq. 
 
 Major William Beresford. 
 
 Charles Grenville Berkeley, Esq. 
 
 Lord Berwick. 
 
 Earl of Beverley. 
 
 John Bidwell, Esq. 
 
 Captain Bigge. 
 
 Hon. Richard Bingham. 
 
 John William Birch, Esq. 
 
 Christopher Blackett, Esq. M.P. 
 
 John T. Blakeney, Esq. 
 
 Lord Blantyre. 
 
 Hon. John Bligh. 
 
 Edward Bligh, Esq. 
 
 Hon. John Bloomfield. 
 
 Henry Bonar, Esq. 
 
 J. C. Boode, Esq. 
 
 Sir William Boothby, Bart. 
 
 Viscount Boringdon. 
 
 Hon. Edward P. Bouverie. 
 
 Henry G. Boyce, Esq. 
 
 Hon. Robert Boyle. 
 
 Viscount Brabazon, M.P. 
 
 Earl of Bradford. 
 
 Thomas William Bramston, Esq. M.P. 
 Thomas Brand, Esq. 
 
 Marquis of Breadalbane. 
 
 Earl of Brecknock. 
 
 Colonel Brinckman Broadhead. 
 
 James Brogden, Esq. 
 
 Sir Arthur de Capel Brooke, Bart. 
 
 Sir Arthur Brinsley Brooke, Bart. 
 Henry Brooke, Esq. 
 
 Peter Langford Brooke, Esq. 
 
 Earl Brownlow. 
 
 Hon. William Brownlow. 
 
 Earl Bruce. 
 
 Lord Ernest Bruce, M.P. 
 
 Charles Dashwood Bruce, Esq. 
 
 Duke of Buccleuch. 
 
 Duke of Buckingham. 
 
 James Wentworth Buller, Esq. M.P. 
 Edward Buller, Esq. M.P. 
 
 Colonel Burdett. 
 
 Lord Burghersh. 
 
 Hon. William Burrell. 
 
 Marquess of Bute. 
 
 H. R. H. The Duke of Cambridge. 
 Earl of Cadogan. 
 
 Earl of Caledon. 
 
 Earl of Carnarvon. 
 
 Frederick Calvert, Esq. 
 
 William Henry Calvert, Esq. 
 
 Sir II. P. Hume Campbell, Bart. M.P. 
 Walter Frederick Campbell, Esq. M.P. 
 Right Hon. Sir Stratford Canning, M.P. 
 Viscount Canning. 
 
 Due de Cannizzaro. 
 
 Viscount Cantilupe, M.P. 
 
 Viscount Canterbury. 
 
 Lieut.-General Hon. Edward Capel. 
 Rear-Admiral Hon. Sir Bladen Capel. 
 Earl of Cardigan. 
 
 Hon. and Rev. Richard Carleton. 
 
 Earl of Carlisle. 
 
 Sir James Carnegie, Bart. 
 
 Sir Thomas Cartwright. 
 
 James A. Casamaijor, Esq. 
 
 THE TRAVELLERS’ CLUB. 
 
 Viscount Castlereagh, M.P. 
 
 Earl Cathcart. 
 
 Lieut.-Col. Hon. Frederick Cathcart. 
 Lieut.-Col. Hon. George Cathcart. 
 Hon. C. Compton Cavendish, M.P. 
 Hon. G. H. Cavendish, M.P. 
 
 Hon. Captain G. J. Cavendish. 
 
 George William Chad, Esq. 
 
 W. M. Chambers, Esq. 
 
 Earl of Charlemont. 
 
 Viscount Chelsea. 
 
 John Walbank Childers, Esq. M.P. 
 Rev. Horace Cholmondeley. 
 
 Lord Henry Cholmondeley. 
 
 J. R. A. Christopher, Esq. M.P. 
 Marquess of Clanricarde. 
 
 Earl of Clanwilliam. 
 
 Earl of Clare. 
 
 Earl of Clarendon. 
 
 Viscount Clements, M.P. 
 
 Hon. Charles Clements. 
 
 Sir George Clerk, Bart. 
 
 Thomas Clifton, Esq. 
 
 Lord Clinton. 
 
 Lieut.-Col. F. Clinton. 
 
 Hon. Robert Clive, M.P. 
 Lieutenant-Colonel Clive. 
 
 Lord Clonbrock. 
 
 Sir C. Rushout Cockerell, Bart. 
 William Gordon Coesvelt, Esq. 
 Lieut.-General Hon. Sir Lowry Cole. 
 Lord Cole, M.P. 
 
 Hon. Arthur Cole, M.P. 
 
 Hon. Henry Cole. 
 
 George Cole, Esq. 
 
 Edward Collingwood, Esq. 
 
 James W. Colville, Esq. 
 
 Philip Davies Cooke, Esq. 
 
 Sir Joseph Copley, Bart. 
 
 Major Corkran. 
 
 Frederick Cornewall, Esq. 
 
 Colonel Cornwall. 
 
 Viscount Corry. 
 
 Right Hon. Henry Corry, M.P. 
 Captain Armar Lowry Corry, R.N. 
 Corbett Cotton, Esq. 
 
 T. P. Courtenay, Esq. 
 
 Earl of Courtown. 
 
 Lord Cowley. 
 
 Earl Cowper. 
 
 Hon. W. F. Cowper, M.P. 
 
 Hon. Spencer Cowper. 
 
 Frederic Cox, Esq. 
 
 Henry Cox, Esq. 
 
 T. F. Crampton, Esq. 
 
 Earl of Craven. 
 
 Lieut.-Colonel James Crauford. 
 Captain Henry Crawford. 
 
 John Creighton, Esq. 
 
 Lord Crewe. 
 
 Rev. Willoughby Crewe. 
 
 Lord Crofton. 
 
 John Cumming, Esq. 
 
 Henry Currie, Esq. 
 
 Sir William Curtis, Bart. 
 
 Timothy Curtis, Esq. 
 
 Hon. Robert Curzon, jun. 
 Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Sir Edward Cust. 
 Hon. Peregrine Cust. 
 
 Frederick Cuthbert, Esq. 
 
 Earl of Daliiousie. 
 
 Captain Robert Dallas. 
 
 Edward Henry Darell, Esq. 
 
 Earl of Dartmouth. 
 
 Francis Dashwood, Esq. 
 
 Edward Dawkins, Esq. 
 
 Clinton Dawkins, Esq. 
 
 Lieut.-Colonel Francis Dawkins. 
 
 Earl De Grey. 
 
 Lord De Lisle and Dudley. 
 
 Capt. Hon. Frederick De Ros, R.N. 
 Lieut.-Colonel Hon. William De Ros. 
 Lord De Tabley. 
 
 William Deedes, Esq. 
 
 John P. Deering, Esq. 
 
 Sir Edward Dering, Bart. 
 
 Earl De La Warr. 
 
 John Evelyn Denison, Esq. 
 
 Sir Augustus D’Este. 
 
 Hon. Henry Devereux. 
 
 Charles Devon, Esq. 
 
 Duke of Devonshire. 
 
 Sir Edward Cromwell Disbrowe. 
 Sholto Douglas, Esq. 
 
 Marquess of Douglas. 
 
 Andrew Snape Douglas, Esq. 
 Marquess of Douro. 
 
 Major-General Sir Thomas Downman. 
 Sir Francis Doyle, Bart. 
 Lieutenant-Colonel Carlo Doyle. 
 Percy Doyle, Esq. 
 
 Francis Hastings Doyle, Esq. 
 
 Sir John D’Oyly, Bart. 
 
 Mr. Serjeant D’Oyly. 
 
 Hon. James R. Drummond. 
 
 Mortimer Percy Drummond, Esq. 
 Charles Drummond, Esq. 
 
 Edward Drummond, Esq. 
 
 George Drummond, jun. Esq. 
 
 Spencer Drummond, Esq. 
 
 Andrew R. Drummond, Esq. 
 
 Lord Duncan. 
 
 Peter Ducane, Esq. 
 
 Hon. William Duncombe, M.P. 
 
 Capt. Hon. A. Duncombe, R.N. M.P. 
 Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Henry Dundas. 
 Hon. Robert Dundas. 
 
 Capt. Hon. Sir Richard Dundas, R.N. 
 Hon. John Charles Dundas, M.P. 
 Lieutenant-Colonel Philip Dundas. 
 
 Sir David T. Dundas, Bart. 
 
 Lord Dunglas. 
 
 Earl of Dunmore. 
 
 George Du Pre, Esq. 
 
 Richard Eaton, Esq. M.P. 
 Viscount Ebrington, M.P. 
 
 Hon. George Edgecumbe. 
 
 Sir Archibald Edmonstone, Bart. 
 
 Hon. Richard Edwardes. 
 
 Hon. George Edwardes. 
 
 Hon. William Edwardes. 
 
 Sir Philip Grey Egerton, Bart. M.P. 
 Lord Francis Egerton, M.P. 
 
 Edward Egerton, Esq. 
 
 Lord Elcho. 
 
 Earl of Elgin. 
 
 Lord Eliot, M.P. 
 
 Lord Ellenborough. 
 
 Right Hon. Henry Ellis. 
 
 Captain Ellis. 
 
 Cuthbert Ellison, Esq. 
 
 Colonel Ellison. 
 
 Lord Elphinstone. 
 
 John Fullarton Elphinstone, Esq. 
 
THE TRAVELLERS’ CLUB. 
 
 33 
 
 Hon. Mountstuart Elphinstone. 
 
 Earl of Enniskillen. 
 
 Rowland Errington, Esq. 
 
 Captain John Erskine, R. N. 
 
 Earl of Essex. 
 
 T. Sutton BucknallEstcourt, Esq. M.P. 
 Major-General Sir William Eustace. 
 William Evans, Esq. 
 
 Earl of Falmouth. 
 
 Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Henry Fane. 
 Major Fanshawe. 
 
 Lieutenant-Colonel Fanshawe. 
 
 Sir W. Minto Farquhar, Bart. 
 
 John Nicholas Fazakerley, Esq. M.P. 
 Major Felix. 
 
 Sir Robert Ferguson, Bart. 
 
 Major R. Ferguson. 
 Lieutenant-Colonel Ferguson. 
 
 Captain G. Ferguson, R.N. M.P. 
 
 Earl of Fife. 
 
 Colonel G. Fielding. 
 
 George Finucane, Esq. 
 
 Colonel Lord Frederick Fitz-Clarence. 
 Edward Fitzgerald, Esq. 
 
 Sir James Fitzgerald, Bart. 
 
 Viscount Fitzharris. 
 
 Thomas Fitzherbert, Esq. 
 
 John Wilson Fitzpatrick, Esq. 
 
 R. W. Fitzpatrick, Esq. 
 
 Lord John Fitzroy. 
 
 Captain George Fitzroy. 
 
 Henry Fitzroy, Esq. 
 
 Captain Hugh Fitzroy. 
 
 Captain Robert Fitzroy, R.N. 
 
 Sir Samuel Fludyer, Bart. 
 
 Hon. St. George Foley. 
 
 John Hodgetts Foley, Esq. 
 
 Edward Thomas Foley, Esq. M.P. 
 Lord Foley. 
 
 Viscount Folkestone. 
 
 John Forbes, Esq. 
 
 Sir John Stuart Forbes, Bart. 
 
 George Forbes, Esq. 
 
 Captain John Forbes. 
 
 Henry F. Forster, Esq. 
 
 Hon. George Fortescue. 
 
 Henry Fortescue, Esq. 
 
 Right Hon. Sir A. J. Foster, Bart. 
 Colonel Fox. 
 
 Henry Frampton, Esq. 
 
 James Franck, M.D. 
 
 Frederick Franks, Esq. 
 
 John Fraser, Esq. 
 
 Sir Thomas Fremantle, Bart. M.P. 
 Captain Charles Fremantle, R.N. 
 Right Hon. Sir William Fremantle. 
 Lieutenant-Colonel Temple French. 
 Right Hon. John Hookham Frere. 
 Bartholomew Frere, Esq. 
 
 John Fuller, Esq. 
 
 Earl of Galloway. 
 
 Sir W. Payne Galway, Bart. 
 
 Nicholas Garry, Esq. 
 
 Sir Stephen Glynn, Bart. M.P. 
 Lieutenant-Colonel George Gordon. 
 Hon. Sir Charles Gordon. 
 
 Right Hon. Sir Robert Gordon. 
 
 Sir Alexander Duff Gordon, Bart. 
 James Adam Gordon, Esq. 
 
 Colonel John Gordon. 
 
 Hon. Charles Alexander Gore. 
 
 Earl of Gosford. 
 
 Francis Gosling, Esq. 
 
 Thomas Leveson Gower, Esq. 
 William Leveson Gower, Esq. 
 
 Lord William Graham. 
 
 Sir Sandford Graham, Bart. 
 
 Major Graham. 
 
 John Grant, Esq. 
 
 Earl of Granville. 
 
 Hon. John Gray. 
 
 General Sir Charles Green, Bart. 
 Thomas Greene, Esq. M.P. 
 
 Arthur F. Gregory, Esq. 
 
 Gregory Gregory, Esq. 
 
 Charles P. Grenfell, Esq. 
 
 Pascoe St. Leger Grenfell, Esq. 
 
 P. R. Grenfell, Esq. 
 
 Brooke Greville, Esq. 
 
 Charles Cavendish Greville, Esq. 
 Henry Greville, Esq. 
 
 Algernon Greville, Esq. 
 
 Captain Hon. F. W. Grey, R.N. 
 Lieut.-Col. Hon. Charles Grey, M.P. 
 Captain Hon. George Grey. 
 
 Sir Charles Grey. 
 
 Earl Grosvenor. 
 
 Lord Robert Grosvenor, M.P. 
 
 Sir Robert Gunning, Bart. 
 
 Hudson Gurney, Esq. 
 
 Earl of Haddington. 
 
 Barnard Hale, Esq. 
 
 John Halkett, Esq. 
 
 George Hall, Esq. 
 
 Sir John Hall, Bart. 
 
 Major Ilallifax. 
 
 Lord Claude Hamilton. 
 
 Hamilton Charles Hamilton, Esq. 
 Terrick Hamilton, Esq. 
 
 Sir George Baillie Hamilton. 
 
 Hon. Gustavus F. Hamilton. 
 
 Charles B. Hamilton, Esq. 
 
 William R. Hamilton, Esq. 
 
 W T . J. Hamilton, Esq. 
 
 Lieutenant II. G. Hamilton, R.N. 
 Captain W. A. B. Hamilton, R.N. 
 Major Sir James John Hamilton, Bart. 
 Hugh Hammersley, Esq. 
 
 Henry Handley, Esq. M.P. 
 
 Thomas Hankey, Esq. 
 
 Sir John Hanmer, Bart. M.P. 
 
 Captain Harcourt. 
 
 George Venables Harcourt, Esq. M.P. 
 Egerton Harcourt, Esq. 
 
 Lieut.-Col. Henry Vernon Harcourt. 
 Captain Octavius Vernon Harcourt. 
 Colonel Francis Vernon Harcourt. 
 Earl of Hardwicke. 
 
 Francis George Hare, Esq. 
 
 William C. Harland, Esq. M.P. 
 
 Hon. George Harris. 
 
 Earl of Harrowby. 
 
 Sir Edmund Hartopp, Bart. 
 
 E. B. Hartopp, Esq. 
 
 Charles Hatchett, Esq. 
 
 Lord Hatherton. 
 
 John Hawkins, Esq. 
 
 Robert William Hay, Esq. 
 
 Sir Edmund Hayes, Bart., M.P. 
 Gilbert John Iieathcote, Esq. M.P. 
 Sir William Heathcote, Bart. 
 
 G. Walker Heneage, Esq. 
 
 K 
 
 H. P. Heneage, Esq. 
 
 Hon. Major Henniker. 
 
 Hon. Sidney Herbert, M.P. 
 
 Hon. Edward Herbert. 
 
 Right Hon. J. C. Herries, M.P. 
 Marquess of Hertford. 
 
 Lord George Hervey. 
 
 Lord Heytesbury. 
 
 Captain J. N. Hibbert, R.N. 
 
 George Hibbert, Esq. 
 
 Colonel G. P. Iiigginson. 
 
 General Lord Hill. 
 
 Lord George Hill. 
 
 Sir Rowland Hill, Bart. M.P. 
 
 Lord Marcus Hill, M.P. 
 
 Henry J. Hinchliffe, Esq. 
 
 Sir John Stuart Hippisley, Bart. 
 
 John Henry Hippisley, Esq. 
 
 W. Weir Hogg, Esq. M.P. 
 
 Sir Henry Bold Houghton, Bart. 
 
 Hpn. Wm. A’Court Holmes, M.P. 
 Viscount Holmesdale. 
 
 Rev. F. P. Hony. 
 
 Viscount Hood. 
 
 Henry Thomas Hope, Esq. M.P. 
 George William Hope, Esq. M.P. 
 Adrian Hope, Esq. 
 
 James R. Hope, Esq. 
 
 Right Hon. Sir R. Wilmot Horton. 
 Robert Wilmot Horton, Esq. 
 
 Captain Christopher Wilmot Horton. 
 Captain Houstoun. 
 
 George Houstoun, Esq. 
 
 Lord Howard de Walden. 
 
 Colonel Hon. F. Greville Howard. 
 
 Hon. James Howard. 
 
 Henry Howard (of Greystoke), Esq. 
 Captain Hon. Edward Howard, M.P. 
 Frederick Howard, Esq. 
 
 Sir Ralph Howard, Bart. 
 
 Viscount Howick, M.P. 
 
 Edward Hulse, Esq. 
 
 Rev. Thomas Hulse. 
 
 Edward Hussey, Esq. 
 
 William Hyett, Esq. 
 
 Earl Jermyn, M.P. 
 
 Hon. George Jerningham. 
 
 Hon. Edward S. Jervis. 
 
 Viscount Ingestre, M.P. 
 
 Right Hon. Sir Alexander Johnston. 
 Sir John Johnstone, Bart. M.P. 
 
 Major Johnstone. 
 
 Henry Hall Joy, Esq. 
 
 G. Peter Irvine, Esq. 
 
 John Irving, Esq. M.P. 
 
 Capt. Hon. William Keith, R.N. 
 Lieut.-Gen. Right Hon. Sir J. Kempt. 
 Earl of Kenmare. 
 
 Langford Kennedy, Esq. 
 
 Major Charles P. Kennedy. 
 
 John Kennedy, Esq. 
 
 Lord Henry Kerr. 
 
 Maj.-Gen. Sir E. Kerrison, Bart. M.P. 
 Henry T. Kilbee, Esq. 
 
 Lord Kilmaine. 
 
 Lord Kinnaird. 
 
 Earl of Kinnoull. 
 
 Henry Gaily Knight, Esq. M.P. 
 
 James Lewis Knight, Esq. 
 
 Hon. Thomas Knox. 
 Lieutenant-Colonel George Knox. 
 
34 
 
 John Labouchere, Esq. 
 
 Right Hon. Henry Labouchere, M.P. 
 Frank Lambert, Esq. 
 
 Colonel Lambert. 
 
 William Lambton, Esq. 
 
 Marquess of Lansclowne. 
 
 Hon. Henry Lascelles. 
 
 Hon. William Sebright Lascelles, M.P. 
 Hon. Edwin Lascelles. 
 
 Hon. Arthur Lascelles. 
 
 Colonel La Touche. 
 
 David Charles La Touche, Esq. 
 
 John D. Latouche, Esq. 
 
 Earl of Lauderdale. 
 
 Hon. Henry Law. 
 
 William Martin Leake, Esq. 
 
 Edmund Henry Lechmere, Esq. 
 
 Duke of Leeds. 
 
 Hon. Heneage Legge. 
 
 Hon. Arthur Legge. 
 
 Hon. and Rev. Henry Legge. 
 
 George Cornwall Legh, Esq. 
 
 Thomas Legh, Esq. 
 
 Hon. W. H. Leicester. 
 
 Sir Charles Lemon, Bart. M.P. 
 
 James William Leslie, Esq. 
 
 Lord Leveson. 
 
 George Cornewall Lewis, Esq. 
 
 Hon. Henry Thomas Liddell. 
 
 Hon. Thomas Liddell, M.P. 
 
 Major Henry Light, R.E. 
 
 Lord Lilford. 
 
 Earl of Limerick. 
 
 Lieutenant-Colonel Lindsay. 
 
 Hugh Hamilton Lindsay, Esq. 
 
 Henry Littledale, Esq. 
 
 Captain G. Lock, R.N. 
 
 Henry Lawes Long, Esq. 
 
 Charles Edward Long, Esq. 
 
 Frederic Beckford Long, Esq. 
 ^Lieut.-Colonel Samuel Long. 
 
 Marquess of Lothian. 
 
 Viscount Lovaine. 
 
 John Henry Lowther, Esq. M.P. 
 
 Earl of Lucan. 
 
 Right Hon. S. Rumbold Lushington. 
 Sir Henry Lushington, Bart. 
 
 Stephen George Lushington, Esq. 
 Captain W. Lyon. 
 
 Lieutenant-Colonel Maberly. 
 Hon. Archibald Macdonald. 
 
 Hon. J. B. Macdonald. 
 
 Campbell Macdonald, Esq. 
 
 Norman Macdonald, Esq. 
 
 Edmund Macdonnell, Esq. 
 
 Major Macdouall. 
 
 John Murray Macgregor, Esq. 
 
 General Sir A. Mackenzie, Bart. 
 
 Colin A. Mackenzie, Esq. 
 
 Mark Mackenzie, Esq. 
 
 Arthur Magenis, Esq. 
 
 Frederick R. Magennis, Esq. 
 
 Richard Magennis, Esq. 
 
 Viscount Maitland. 
 
 Sir Alexander Malet, Bart. 
 
 Viscount Mahon, M.P. 
 
 Niel Malcolm, Esq. 
 
 Henry Mandeville, Esq. 
 
 Earl of Mansfield. 
 
 John Mansfield, Esq. 
 
 Edward Marjoribanks, Esq. 
 
 Colonel William Markham. 
 
 THE TRAVELLERS’ CLUB. 
 
 Captain Henry Byam Martin, R.N. 
 Hon. Fox Maule, M.P. 
 
 John Maxwell, Esq. M.P. 
 
 W. C. Maxwell, Esq. 
 
 Viscount Maynard. 
 
 Edward Meade, Esq. 
 
 Captain Robert Meade. 
 
 Richard Charles Mellish, Esq. 
 
 William Meyer, Esq. 
 
 Captain Meynell, R.N. M.P. 
 
 Sir William F. F. Middleton, Bart. 
 Humphrey St. John Mildmay, Esq. 
 Hugo St. John Mildmay, Esq. 
 
 Henry St. John Mildmay, Esq. 
 Edward St. John Mildmay, Esq. 
 
 Rev. Thomas Mills. 
 
 Earl of Minto. 
 
 John Mitchell, Esq. jun. 
 
 Henry Mitford, Esq. 
 
 Hon. Francis Molyneux. 
 
 Sir Charles Monck, Bart. 
 
 Charles A. Monck, Esq. 
 
 Lord Monson. 
 
 William Monson, Esq. 
 
 Lieut.-Col. Hon. John Montagu. 
 
 Hon. Spencer Montagu. 
 
 Rev. George Moore. 
 
 John Moore, Esq. 
 
 Lieutenant-Colonel Moore. 
 
 Peter Moore, Esq. 
 
 Francis Moore, Esq. 
 
 Sir John Mordaunt, Bart. M.P. 
 
 John Philip Morier, Esq. 
 
 James Morier, Esq. 
 
 Earl of Morley. 
 
 Viscount Morpeth, M.P. 
 
 Sir John Bacon Sawrey Morritt. 
 William Mundy, Esq. 
 
 Earl of Munster. 
 
 R. Impey Murchison, Esq. 
 
 Lieut.-Gen. Right Hon. Sir G. Murray. 
 Colonel Hon. Henry Murray. 
 
 Lieut. Hon. Henry A. Murray, R.N. 
 Hon. Charles John Murray. 
 
 Hon. Charles A. Murray. 
 
 Hon. David H. Murray. 
 
 Alexander Murray, Esq. 
 
 Captain J. Digby Murray. 
 
 Sir Archibald Murray, Bart. 
 
 Captain II. E. Napier, R.N. 
 Richard Neave, Esq. 
 
 Digby Neave, Esq. 
 
 Viscount Neville. 
 
 Viscount Newark. 
 
 Francis Newdigate, Esq. 
 
 C. N. Newdigate, Esq. 
 
 William Newnham, Esq. 
 
 John Nicholl, Esq. M.P. 
 
 Captain Nicholson. 
 
 Richard H. Noble, Esq. 
 
 Marquess of Normanby. 
 
 Lord Norreys, M.P. 
 
 Marquess of Northampton. 
 
 Earl of Northesk. 
 
 Lord North wick. 
 
 G. E. Nugent, Esq. 
 
 Sir John Ogilvy, Bart. 
 
 Adolphus Kent Oom, Esq. 
 
 Earl of Orkney. 
 
 Marquess of Ormonde. 
 
 Sir John Osborn, Bart. 
 
 Lord Ossulston, M.P. 
 
 Alexander Oswald, Esq. 
 
 Right Hon. Sir Gore Ouseley, Bart. 
 
 Richard Pakeniiam, Esq. 
 
 Geoffrey Palmer, Esq. 
 
 Viscount Palmerston, M.P. 
 
 Woodbine Parish, Esq. 
 
 Robert Parnther, Esq. 
 
 Robert G. Parnther, Esq. 
 
 John Wilson Patten, Esq. M.P. 
 Captain Sir S. J. Pechell, Bart. R.N. 
 Captain George Richard Pechell, R.N. 
 Charles Peers, Esq. 
 
 Hon. Dudley Pelham, R.N. 
 
 Hon. Frederic Pelham, R.N. 
 
 Thomas Pemberton, Esq. M.P. 
 Edward Penrhyn, Esq. 
 
 Samuel Peploe, Esq. 
 
 Captain Hon. William Percy, R.N. 
 Hon. Charles Bertie Percy. 
 
 Hon. Josceline Percy. 
 
 Right Hon. Henry Pierrepont. 
 Grenville Pigot, Esq. 
 
 Frederick Pigou, Esq. 
 
 Right Hon. Sir Joseph Planta, M.P. 
 W. H. C. Plowden, Esq. 
 
 Hon. E. R. Plunkett, M.P. 
 
 Viscount Pollington, M.P. 
 
 Hon. Charles Ponsonby. 
 
 Hon. William Ponsonby. 
 
 Hon. John Ponsonby, M.P. 
 
 Lord Powerscourt. 
 
 Edward Protheroe, Esq. M.P. 
 
 Lord Prudhoe. 
 
 Captain Apsley Pulteney. 
 
 Philip Pusey, Esq. M.P. 
 
 Lord George Quin. 
 
 Lord Radstock. 
 
 Lieutenant-General Ramsay. 
 Lieutenant-Colonel John Ratcliffe. 
 
 Sir John Rae Reid, Bart. M.P. 
 
 Sir John Rennie. 
 
 Right Hon. Thomas Spring Rice, M.P. 
 Campbell Riddell, Esq. 
 
 Sir Matthew White Ridley, Bart. 
 
 Lord Rivers. 
 
 Abraham G. Robarts, Esq. 
 
 Baron Robeck. 
 
 Lord Rokeby. 
 
 Right Hon. Sir George Rose, M.P. 
 Major Hugh Rose. 
 
 William Rose, Esq. 
 
 Charles Ross, Esq. 
 
 R. Charles Rowley, Esq. 
 
 Charles E. Rumbold, Esq. M.P. 
 
 Lord John Russell, M.P. 
 
 Lord William Russell. 
 
 Lord George William Russell. 
 
 Charles Russell, Esq. 
 
 Lord Russell, M.P. 
 
 Lord Ruthven. 
 
 Hon. Frederick D. Ryder. 
 
 Hon. Granville D. Ryder. 
 
 Earl of St. Germans. 
 
 Lord St. Helens. 
 
 Major F. B. St. John. 
 
 Marquess of Salisbury. 
 
 Samuel Sanders, Esq. 
 
 Viscount Sandon, M.P. 
 
THE TRAVELLERS’ CLUB. 
 
 35 
 
 Earl of Sandwich. 
 
 Rev. John Sanford. 
 
 Hon. Charles Stuart Saville. 
 
 Lord John Scott. 
 
 Sir William Scott, of Ancram. 
 
 Hon. Henry Scott. 
 
 William Hugh Scott, Esq. 
 
 Hon. Francis Scott. 
 
 Lord Seaford. 
 
 Thomas Sebright, Esq. 
 
 Earl of Sefton. 
 
 Earl of Selkirk. 
 
 John Thomas Selwyn, Esq. 
 
 Lord Seymour, M.P. 
 
 Lord George Seymour. 
 
 Lord Archibald Seymour. 
 
 George H. Seymour, Esq. 
 
 Henry Seymour, Esq. 
 Lieutenant-Colonel Merrick Shawe. 
 Sir George Shee, Bart. 
 
 Earl of Sheffield. 
 
 Spencer Shelley, Esq. 
 
 Charles Brinsley Sheridan, Esq. 
 
 C. Kinnaird Sheridan, Esq. 
 
 Richard Brinsley Sheridan, Esq. 
 Captain Sliirreff, R.N. 
 
 George Silvertop, Esq. 
 
 Lord Skelmersdale. 
 
 R. Vernon Smith, Esq. M.P. 
 
 George Robert Smith, Esq. 
 
 John Thomas Smyth, Esq. 
 
 Ralph Sneyd, Esq. 
 
 Lord Granville Somerset, M.P. 
 
 Sir William Somerville, Bart. 
 
 Lord Sondes. 
 
 Lord Southampton. 
 
 Hon. Francis Spencer. 
 
 Hon. Augustus A. Spencer. 
 
 Hon. G. F. Spencer. 
 
 Earl Stanhope. 
 
 John Spencer Stanhope, Esq. 
 
 Lieut.-Col. Philip Spencer Stanhope. 
 Sir John Thomas Stanley, Bart. 
 Edward Stanley, Esq. 
 
 Edward John Stanley, Esq. M.P. 
 William Owen Stanley, Esq. 
 
 R. M. Staples, Esq. 
 
 Augustus G. Stapleton, Esq. 
 
 Sir George Thomas Staunton, Bart. 
 Captain Henry S. Stephens. 
 
 Rowland Stephenson, Esq. 
 
 William W. Stephenson, Esq. 
 
 Hon. Keith Stewart. 
 
 Alexander Robert Stewart, Esq. 
 Patrick Maxwell Shaw Stewart, Esq. 
 Edward Stewart, Esq. 
 
 William Bruce Stopford, Esq. 
 
 Robert F. Stopford, Esq. 
 
 Viscount Stormont, M.P. 
 
 Richard Strachey, Esq. 
 
 Viscount Strangford. 
 
 Hon. John Fox Strangways, M.P. 
 
 Hon. William F. Strangways. 
 
 Viscount Strathallan. 
 
 Lord James Stuart, M.P. 
 
 Lord Dudley C. Stuart. 
 
 Hon. Charles Francis Stuart. 
 
 Hon. John Stuart. 
 
 Charles Stuart, Esq. 
 
 Henry Stuart, Esq. 
 
 Henry Villiers Stuart, Esq. 
 
 Captain Charles Stuart. 
 
 Captain William Villiers Stuart. 
 
 Duke of Sutherland. 
 
 Captain C. H. Swimburne, R.N. 
 Viscount Sydney. 
 
 Earl Talbot. 
 
 Hon. John Talbot. 
 
 C. R. M. Talbot, Esq. M.P. 
 
 Earl of Tankerville. 
 
 Right Hon. Sir Brook Taylor. 
 
 Ecfward Taylor, Esq. 
 
 Bridges Taylor, Esq. 
 
 Lord Teignmouth. 
 
 Hon. William Temple. 
 
 Viscount Templetown. 
 
 Captain E. K. Tenison. 
 
 Hon. A. Thelluson. 
 
 Right Hon. C. Poulett Thomson, M.P. 
 Andrew Henry Thomson, Esq. 
 
 Robert Throckmorton, Esq. 
 
 Lord William Thynne. 
 
 George Tierney, Esq. 
 
 Daniel Tighe, Esq. 
 
 James Townley Tisdall, Esq. 
 
 Marquess of Titchfield. 
 
 Charles Towneley, Esq. 
 
 John Towneley, Esq. 
 
 Henry Hanbury Tracy, Esq. 
 
 Alexander Trotter, Esq. 
 
 Captain J. Trotter. 
 
 Henry Tuffiiell, Esq. 
 
 Charles John Kemys Tynte, Esq. M.P. 
 
 Maj.-Gen. Hon. A. Percy Upton. 
 Hon. Henry Montague Upton. 
 
 Hon. Arthur Upton. 
 
 Hon. George Upton. 
 
 Viscount Valletort. 
 
 L. G. Vandeleur, Esq. 
 
 Lord Harry Vane. 
 
 Right Hon. Sir Charles R. Vaughan. 
 Major Thomas Wright Vaughan. 
 
 Lord Vernon. 
 
 Sir Harry Verney, Bart. M.P. 
 
 Robert Verschoyle, Esq. 
 
 Hon. Thomas Vesey. 
 
 Charles P. Villiers, Esq. 
 
 Edward Villiers, Esq. 
 
 Henry W. Vincent, Esq. 
 
 George Vivian, Esq. 
 
 Major Vivian, M.P. 
 
 Robert Vyner, Esq. 
 
 Henry Vyner, Esq. 
 
 George Howard Vyse, Esq. 
 
 Sir Richard Vyvyan, Bart. M.P. 
 
 Charles Baring Wall, Esq. M.P. 
 Lord Walpole. 
 
 Hon. Lieutenant-Colonel Walpole. 
 
 Sir John Walsh, Bart. M.P. 
 
 James Hamilton Ward, Esq. 
 
 Thomas Lawrence Ward, Esq. 
 
 William Ward, Esq. 
 
 Right Hon. Sir G. Warrender, Bart. 
 Marquess of Waterford. 
 
 Lord Waterpark. 
 
 Hon. Richard Watson. 
 Lieutenant-Colonel Webster. 
 
 Hon. Henry Wellesley. 
 
 Rev. Henry Wellesley. 
 
 Hon. William Long Wellesley. 
 
 Duke of Wellington. 
 
 Henry Wells, Esq. 
 
 Colonel Wells. 
 
 Earl of Wemyss. 
 
 Hon. Charles West. 
 
 Lord Wharncliffe. 
 
 Captain White. 
 
 St. Vincent Whitshed, Esq. 
 Lieutenant-Colonel Wigram. 
 
 Hon. Richard Wilbraharn, M.P. 
 Captain Hon. Edward Wilbraharn. 
 Randle Wilbraharn, jun. Esq. 
 
 Major Wildman. 
 
 Edward Hosier Williams, Esq. 
 
 Sir Hedworth Williamson, Bart. 
 
 Sir Henry Willoughby, Bart. 
 
 Foley Wilmot, Esq. 
 
 Major Eardley Wilmot. 
 
 Capt. C. H. Wintffiam. 
 
 Joseph Smyth Windham, Esq. 
 
 Captain Winnington, M.P. 
 
 Thomas E. Winnington, Esq. 
 
 Capt. Hon. E. Wodehouse, R.N. 
 
 Sir Alexander Wood. 
 
 Major Thomas Wood, M.P. 
 
 Charles Wood, Esq. M.P. 
 
 Alexander Wood, Esq. 
 
 Major-General Sir J. G. Woodford. 
 Hon. John Stuart Wortley. 
 
 Hon. James Stuart Wortley. 
 
 Major Charles A. Wrottesly. 
 
 Right Hon. Sir Henry Williams Wynn. 
 
 Loro Yarborough. 
 
 Earl of Yarmouth. 
 
 S. W. Singer, Secretary. 
 




 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 ' 
 
 ' 
 
 
 
 
TRAVEULEK’ 8 CLUB HOUTS 
 
 Jnh/h Wialz. Architectural Library. 5ff.Hu/h, Holborn 
 
TRAVELLER'S CLUJB HOUSE. 
 


THE TBiWlLEli CHUB HOUSE. 
 

=^-=7'- — 
 
TfSATElLBiS’S CMTB HOUSE. 
 
—- ——-- == 
 
Ornament in String eours& 
 
 THE TRAVELLER' § CLUB HOUSE 
 
 flats, 7. 
 
 DETAILS OF PRINCIPAL FRONT. 
 
 John Wedto.JTchitecturailibrary. 59. Jfigli Solborn,. 
 
Entablature 
 
 ■ 
 
 T HE TRAVELLERS CLUB HOtTSE. 
 
 DETAILS OF PRINCIPAL FRONT. 
 
 Jobi Whale. Architectural library. 53. Jfigh UMorn. 
 

 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 
 , 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Architectural Library, 
 June, 1839. 
 
 John Weale has recently published the following works:— 
 
 A Theoretical and Practical Treatise on Oblique Bridges. By G. W. Buck, C.E. 4to. 15 plates. Price 12s. 
 
 A Practical Treatise on the Construction of Oblique Arches. By John Hart, Mason. Imperial 8vo. 10 plates. 
 Second edition, improved and enlarged. Price 7s. 
 
 A Treatise on Arches and Vaults, rendered easy and practicable for the Builder. By W. Bland, Esq., of Hartlip, Kent. 
 8vo. Second edition, much improved. 107 wood-cuts. Price 7s. 
 
 Analytical Theory of the Steam Engine, demonstratively for all kinds of Steam Engines in use. By the Comtf. de 
 Pambour. In 8vo., now first published. Price 12s. 
 
 A Practical Treatise on Steam Engine Boilers. By R. Armstrong. In 8vo. Numerous wood-cuts. Second edition, 
 much improved. Price 7s. 6d. 
 
 The Finest Existing Specimens of Ancient Half-Timbered Houses in England. By M. Habershon. In large 4to., 
 with fine plates. The work is now complete, in six parts. Price £2. 2s., or £2. 5s. in neat cloth boards. Parts 4, 5, 6, to 
 complete sets, may be had. 
 
 Rules and Data for the Steam Engine, both Stationary and Locomotive, and for Railways, Canals, and Turnpike Roads, &c. 
 By H. Adcock, C.E. 12mo. Price 2s. 6d. 
 
 A Popular Treatise on the Warming and Ventilation of Buildings. By C. J. Richardson, Architect. Plates. Second 
 edition, in 8vo. Price 12s. 6d. 
 
 A Treatise on the Equilibrium of Arches. By J. Gwilt, Architect. Plates. 8vo. Third edition. Price 5s. 
 
 An Engraving of Mr. Adams’s Vertebrated Train Carriage for Railways, to diminish friction and concussion. Price 2s. 
 
 WORKS PUBLISHING AND PREPARING FOR PUBLICATION. 
 
 Theory, Practice, and Architecture of Bridges, of Stone, Timber, Iron, Wire, and Suspension. Edited by James Hann, 
 King’s College, and Wm. Hosking, F.S.A., and Civil Engineer, assisted by Professor Moseley and other eminent scientific men. 
 In royal 8vo. Upwards of 100 fine engravings. Price £1. 16s. to subscribers, to non-subscribers £3. 3s. Parts 1, 2, and 3, 
 containing thirty-nine plates, are published, each 3s. Part 4, June 25. 
 
 Papers of the Corps of Royal Engineers. In 4to. Vol. 3, containing numerous engravings. 
 
 Ornamental Iron Work and Lodges of the Royal Parks. 50 plates. Large 4to. Price £2. 2s. 
 
 Steam Navigation. Appendix to Tredgold’s valuable work on the Steam Engine. Imperial folio. 20 plates, containing 
 The Rainbow Iron Steam Packet. 
 
 The Firebrand Government Steam Vessel of War. 
 
 The Russian Imperial Iron Steam Vessel the Nevka. 
 
 The United States’ Guard Steam Vessel of War “Fulton.” 
 
 Steam Machinery at Woolwich. 
 
 Iron Steam Yacht “ Glow-Worm,” belonging to Thomas A. Smith, Esq. 
 
 Price 20s. It is proposed to publish the above in parts, 10s. each, to be called Appendix A and B. 
 
 A Practical Trains* on Locomotive Engines. By the Comt* d* Bamboo. Second edition, much enlarged. In 8vo. 
 
 A Pkacticai. Treatise on Military Sorvhy.no. By Lieut. Frome, R.E., Surveying General of Southern Australia. In 
 8vo., with plates. Price 10s. 6d. 
 
 The Bricklayer and Builder’s Guide. By F. W. Simms, C.E. 
 
 Nicholson's Carpenter's New Guide, improved to the present time. Into. 90 plates. Price £1. Is. 
 
 A Treatise on Hydraulics. By Richard Beamish, Esq. 
 
 Elementary Principles of Carpentry. By Thob. Treboolu, C.E. A new edition, with vast additions, edited b, Professor 
 Barlow. 50 plates, 28 of which are additional. 4to. Price 28s. 
 
 A Practical Treatise on the Strength of Cast Iron and other Metals. By Thos. Treeoolo, C.E. Third edition, with 
 considerable additions. By E. Hodgkinson, Esq., of Manchester. In 8vo. 
 
 Practical Treatises on Mill Work and other Machinery. By Thos. Treegolb, C.E. A new edition, with additions and. 
 corrections. By Geo. Rennie, Esq., F.R.S. 2 vols. 8vo. Numerous plates of Mdls, Machinery, Too s, c. 
 
 Mr. Wrale's Catalogue of his publication, on Architects, Civil, Military, and Mechanical Engineering, may be had gratis. 
 
BY THE SAME EDITOR. 
 
 ILLUSTRATIONS OF THE PUBLIC BUILDINGS OF LONDON; 
 
 With Historical and Descriptive Accounts of each Edifice. Second Edition, greatly enlarged. Two vols. royal 8vo., 
 with 165 Plates. Price £3. 3s., half-morocco, gilt tops. 
 
 “ The readers of the Architectural Magazine cannot be ignorant of Mr. Leeds’s eminence as a critic and writer on subjects of 
 architecture, even judging by those articles alone which are avowedly from his pen.—The ‘ Illustrations of the Public Buildings 
 have been so greatly improved by Mr. Leeds’s notes, as well as by his expunging portions of the text, that it might almost pass 
 
 for a new work.”- “ After thus approving of the labours of the present Editor, we can spare room only to give an idea of the 
 
 contents and some extracts. Vol. I. describes twenty-two churches, nine theatres, and three law buildings. Vol. II. describes 
 twenty commercial and civic buildings, two buildings connected with literature, thirteen palaces and private mansions, and seven 
 bridges.” —Architectural Magazine. 
 
 “ The rapid growth of the Metropolis and the increase of novelties had long since called for an addition to this work; and the 
 public-spirited publisher now having the property of it has supplied this want, and, we are happy to say, in a manner worthy of 
 himself and the object concerned. The editor too, in taking upon himself the task of it, found that his efforts must not be confined 
 merely to chronicling what is new, but that it might be beneficially exerted in remedying some defects which existed in the labours 
 of his predecessors. He found that in many cases extraneous matter might be removed, which, however interesting to the general 
 reader, was by no means useful to the professional student; and in doing this he has availed himself of the opportunity of introducing 
 much new matter without increasing the bulk of the volumes. At the same time he has amended the old subjects by introducing 
 some further professional information, and rectifying the errors which are inseparable from a work of such discursive character.”— 
 Civil Engineer and Architect’s Journal. 
 
 “ We are here presented with a long and highly interesting essay, entitled * Preliminary Remarks on the Architecture of Theatres.’ 
 The subject itself is one that has much novelty to recommend it, and a great deal of information is here brought to bear upon it both 
 in the ‘ Remarks ’ themselves and in the numerous notes, some of which contain biographical notices of Thomond, Weinbrenner, and 
 other foreign architects, together with some account of the Theatre of the Hermitage at St. Petersburg, one designed by Mikhaelov, 
 and the celebrated one at Bordeaux. It should be stated, however, that this additional section is not included in the Supplement 
 published separately for the accommodation of the purchasers of the first edition. Neither does that Supplementary part contain 
 any of the ‘ Remarks,’ notes, and corrections ; but merely the plates and letter-press belonging to the new subjects which have 
 been inserted in the work ; and among which are the new Palace (illustrated with several plans and elevations), the Archway in the 
 Green Park, National Gallery, Travellers’ Club-house, Fishmongers’ Hall, Corn Exchange, and Post Office. 
 
 “ With the exception of the last-mentioned, all the other buildings now added to the work are described and commented upon 
 by the editor himself; and whatever may be thought of some of his opinions, we may venture to assert that his criticisms will be 
 perused with interest, if only because there is a freshness of tone and thought in them that secures attention.” —Art Union. 
 
 MOLLER’S MEMORIALS OF GERMAN GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE, 
 
 With additional Notes and Illustrations. Octavo. Price 85. cloth boards. 
 
 “ Mr. Leeds has performed his task in a most con amove spirit, enriching the volume with much interesting matter, derived 
 from various German writers, and also by several notes of his own.”— Architectural Magazine. 
 
 Atlas of Plates to the preceding, large folio, price, with translation, £4. 4s. 
 
— 
 
 * *