rejected, and nothing put in its place. He was also disappointed, that,
as has been seen in the last chapter, the design which he prepared for a
new building, and by which he thought that his name might be permanently
connected with the Academy, fell to the ground. But he still took as
much interest as ever in its action. To the last he was a constant
attendant at its meetings and on its business. One thing he never could
be persuaded to do for this or for any other institution, viz., to
deliver lectures or speeches, or even read papers on architectural
subjects. But anything else he was ready and glad to attempt, and he
prized his connection with the Royal Academy at the highest possible
value.
ROYAL INSTITUTE OF BRITISH ARCHITECTS.--With this important institution
he was connected from the beginning. In November, 1831, he discussed the
principles of its formation with Professor Donaldson, to whom it has
owed so much, both in its first foundation and its subsequent
development. On December 3rd, 1834, he attended its first meeting, and
records in his diary the completion of its charter on January 17th,
1837. Subsequently he became a Fellow and a Vice-President of the
Institute. On the death of Earl de Grey, when it was decided that the
President’s chair should be occupied by a professional man, it was
offered to him, and it was a subject of great regret to his friends,
that the dislike of publicity, to which reference has already been made,
prevented his acceptance of it. But he recognised the great value of the
Society to the architectural profession, and rejoiced to see its growth
and progress.
He had indeed much reason to feel grateful to the Institute for its
generous appreciation of his position and labours, and for its hearty
support in his time of professional trials. In 1850 he was chosen to
receive the Queen’s Gold Medal, and it was presented to him on June 3rd
by Earl de Grey, the President, who described most truly and skilfully
the peculiar difficulties under which he laboured at the time. In the
painful remuneration controversy, the Institute ventured boldly to
interfere in defence of the architect, and to send to Mr. Wilson the
Resolution which is quoted elsewhere. It was true that he was fighting
the battle of the profession, but it was not the less true, that, on
this very account, the interference of the Institute was likely to be
stigmatised as interested and obtrusive. After his death the council of
the Institute suggested his burial in Westminster Abbey, and sent to his
widow and family an address of hearty and affectionate condolence.
In fact, the whole course of its official proceedings showed, in his
case as in many others, that, in spite of the personal rivalries and of
the differences of styles and principles which are found in all
professions, and perhaps especially in those of an artistic character,
the whole body of architects was ready to show appreciation of work, and
willing to give support and sympathy to one who was devoting to his art
his time, his talents, and his life.
The younger Architectural Society (the Architectural Museum) also
attracted his interest. And in the formation of the Architectural
Publication Society he was willing to give all possible aid. He
contributed to their Architectural Dictionary an article on Baalbec, and
would no doubt have done more, had he lived longer after his retirement
from active work.
But, although architectural and artistic societies held the first place
in his regard, they by no means engrossed his whole attention. It was
certainly characteristic of his mind to be ready in sympathy, and quick
in appreciation of all kinds of intellectual pursuits, though literature
had much less charm for him than either Science or Art. And, since he
felt that architecture was a many-sided profession, in contact not only
with all branches of Art, but also with scientific principles and
inventions, and all those practical powers which occupy the sphere of
“business,” he did not find that devotion to it blunted the edge of his
interest in other things. At the “Friday evenings” of the Royal
Institution in Albemarle Street he seldom failed to attend. I can well
remember the deep interest, with which he entered into the original
researches or wide generalisations, so often brought forward there by
such men as Faraday and Owen. The general type of mind found in our
great scientific men at all times delighted him; for its union of
simplicity of aim and enthusiasm for science with profoundness and
originality of thought, was the type of genius with which he felt the
warmest sympathy. He became in due course a Fellow of the Royal Society;
and, valuing the honour greatly, he availed himself of every opportunity
of enjoying its privileges. But I do not find that he took any prominent
part in its action. The same is true of the “British Association.” He
frequently attended its meetings, in the days when it was the fashion to
sneer at it, as well as in his later years, when it had become one of
the recognised institutions of the country. But here again he never came
prominently forward. He was one of the listeners rather than of the
speakers on all such occasions.
ROYAL COMMISSION OF 1851.--In 1850 Sir Charles was appointed as a member
of the Royal Commission for the Great Exhibition of 1851. The scheme of
the building was discussed, and his pencil was immediately busy. He
thought of a great building, a polygon of many sides. In the centre was
to be a great hall for the larger objects, crowned by a gigantic dome,
and surrounded by concentric ranges of rooms for the exhibition of the
smaller objects. This, and many other schemes, were all put aside by Sir
J. Paxton’s Crystal Palace; and Sir Charles then ventured to offer some
suggestions for the improvement of the “grand conservatory.” The chief
was to do away with the proposed flat ceilings, and vault both transepts
and nave. The recommendation was adopted for the transept only. As to
the nave, certain practical difficulties were raised (which have been
since disproved by experience at the Crystal Palace at Sydenham), and
there the flat ceiling was retained to the great detriment of the
internal appearance of the building.[116] He could not share the popular
enthusiasm as to its general effect, though he recognised fully its
practical convenience and the ingenuity of its contrivance, and
confessed it to be adapted most excellently to a temporary construction.
His work as a Royal Commissioner led him to form a judgment on the
schemes, which were formed for disposing of the surplus gained by the
Exhibition, and so to conceive the designs which have been described in
the last chapter. It probably also led to his appointment, in
conjunction with his friend Mr. Cockerell, to represent English
architecture on the juries of the Exposition Universelle. Being now
somewhat less absorbed in professional work, he was able to give
considerable time to the work, and spent more than two months in Paris.
On this occasion he received the Gold Medal of honour for Architecture,
and had an opportunity, which he highly valued, of making or renewing
acquaintance with the leading continental architects.
This was the only occasion which gave him any opportunity of acting
abroad for the furtherance of his art. But his position, as a leader in
his profession, had long been recognised by foreign artistic bodies. In
1842 he received his first foreign honour in being elected into the
Academy of St. Luke at Rome; and after this followed a succession of
elections to the Academy of St. Petersburg in 1845, of Belgium in 1847,
of Prussia in 1849, of Sweden in 1850. Subsequently he was elected into
the Academy of Denmark, and into the American Institute. Of these
affiliations he was able to avail himself but little, for his days of
foreign travel were over. But the honours he could not but value highly.
Perhaps he valued them the more, when attacks began to be made upon him
at home; for from them, as well as from intercourse with distinguished
foreigners in England, he found abundant evidence of the high position
which his works occupied in the estimation of continental critics.
On the occasion of the Emperor of Russia’s visit to England, he visited
the New Palace under the guidance of the architect, and requested that
drawings of its chief elevations might be furnished to him. These were
acknowledged in handsome terms, and the acknowledgment was accompanied
by a present of the drawings of the Winter Palace at St. Petersburg, and
one of those magnificent diamond snuff-boxes which seem to be the
established gifts of royalty.
There were indeed few foreign visitors, distinguished either for rank or
for artistic eminence, who did not visit and admire his great work, and
the _éloge_ of M. Hittorf, read at the meeting of the Five Academies of
Paris on August 14th, 1860 (making all allowance for the time and
occasion), may be taken as not unfairly representing the general feeling
of continental artists.[117]
PROFESSIONAL ARBITRATIONS.--Besides the exercise of influence in public
commissions and institutions, an architect who has attained a high rank
in his profession, especially at a time when he is beginning to
relinquish active work, has an important sphere of exertion in respect
of professional arbitrations.
Open competitions are, and long have been, the order of the day. In the
decision of the prize much of the dissatisfaction often caused, and the
practical injustice often done, arises, not from any partiality or want
of ability in the judges, but from the want of practical knowledge of
detail, or of the advice of a practical assessor. There are drawbacks to
the value of a professional arbitrator; certainly much difficulty and
odium attach to his position. But to see the way through a complicated
plan, to judge how an attractive elevation will work out, and how far an
estimate can possibly be kept to, must certainly require the aid of
professional knowledge.
Accordingly, in the latter part of his career, Sir Charles Barry was
not unfrequently employed as professional arbiter in public
competitions.
In 1845 he was appointed to adjudge the first place in the competition
for the Free Church College in Edinburgh--a building which was to occupy
one of the finest sites in the city. He bestowed great pains on the
adjudication, and gave some suggestions for the improvement of the
design. But the award was practically set aside, and the present
building erected, from a design for which he was not responsible.
In 1847 he was again employed to examine and report on the drawings of
the competitors for the erection of the Glasgow College.
In December 1852 the Town Council of Leeds requested him to undertake
the office of professional arbiter in the competition for the erection
of their Town Hall. He went into the matter with his usual care and
energy, and satisfied himself that the design of Mr. Brodrick, then
comparatively a young man, was decidedly the best. On this occasion he
had to meet some considerable efforts of local interest in behalf of
other competitors; and at one time thought, that he might be obliged to
throw up his office, and publish the correspondence. But he stood firm
in what he considered to be his duty, and succeeded in securing the
erection of a building, which has been since very generally admired.
On all such occasions he showed remarkably his characteristic power of
throwing himself, heart and soul, into the work before him. On the
process of forming his judgment he bestowed infinite pains, and usually
spent some considerable time. But his judgments, when formed, were
usually positive and decisive, inclining perhaps occasionally to
consider the capacities of a design, more than the standard of its
performance, and valuing imperfect promise more highly than finished
mediocrity. This is a tendency, which doubtless may be pushed even to
the verge of injustice. Still it must be considered as that which has on
the whole, more than any other, the double merit of rewarding real
talent, and of securing men, who are capable of carrying out and
perfecting, in the process of their accomplishment, buildings of real
artistic excellence. It is almost needless to add, that he maintained
his judgments unflinchingly, and defied all influences which tended to
interfere with their independence and effectiveness.
ST. PAUL’S COMMITTEE.--In 1858 Sir Charles was placed upon the Committee
for administering the St. Paul’s Cathedral Fund, a fund raised to assist
the Dean and Chapter, first, in the maintenance of the Special Evening
Services, and next in carrying out, if possible, some worthy system of
decoration of the Cathedral. He took the warmest interest in the work.
Admiring, as he did, enthusiastically the genius of Sir C. Wren, he felt
it a privilege to contribute in the slightest degree to the
embellishment of his great work, and its adaptation to the needs of our
own time. Here, as in other cases, his only difficulty was to persuade
himself to rest contented with that which was immediately practicable,
instead of stretching on towards the ideal conceived in his own mind.
To some of the changes actually made he gave in consequence but a
doubtful acquiescence.
In fact, to the position chosen for the new organ, and the arrangements
for the nave congregations depending on that position, he was very
strongly opposed--so much so, that at one time he thought of resigning
his place on the Commission, and, when he refrained from this,
considered it his duty to protest formally against the scheme adopted.
His own view was to place the great organ over the western entrance (as
is done in some foreign cathedrals), and to have only a small choir
organ for use at the eastern end of the church. The great organ in the
south transept he considered to interfere with the simplicity,
spaciousness, and grandeur of the central area of the Cathedral.
It is needless to say that his objections were most courteously
received, and carefully considered, although the Dean and the Committee
did not feel able to yield to them. As usual, he took up and expressed
his views pretty strongly, but he did not at all lose interest in the
proceedings of the Committee, because they were not adopted. In any case
it was much to co-operate in throwing open the Cathedral for the first
time to an use worthy of its dignity and its magnificence of scale, and
(what with him was a great, though, of course, a secondary
consideration) in drawing public notice and admiration to the noblest
work of our great English architect. He was present at almost every
meeting of the Committee, and ventured to offer to Mr. Penrose, the
architect of the Dean and Chapter, practical suggestions which were
kindly and cordially received.
Only four days before his death (on May 8th, 1860) he had written a
paper to the Dean, on the subject of the proposed arrangements;--its
handwriting as firm, and its style as vigorous as ever.[118] It is
interesting to remember that this, which is (so far as is known) his
last professional paper, should have had for its object the preservation
and the adornment of a work, which he regarded as one of the finest in
the world. To him, as to others, it seemed inexplicable and disgraceful,
that, while elaborate restoration is going on of every cathedral and
abbey, almost of every remarkable parish church, the cathedral of the
metropolis should be neglected, and the appeals for its decoration left
almost unanswered. He had no sympathy with the intolerant Gothicism,
which would pass over all that is classical, nor could he understand
that the absence of the strong local feeling, which has rebuilt
Chichester Cathedral, in great measure, by the contributions of Sussex
alone, could be a sufficient reason for the neglect of the grandest
building in London. He naturally thought of the magnificence of St.
Peter’s, and he longed to replace the dreary coldness of St. Paul’s by a
splendour which _mutatis mutandis_ should rival its Italian anti-type.
Sooner or later it must be that these longings will be realised.
Such is a brief record of the chief of his general public actions; many
others there must have been, which have left no trace. He was one of
those busy men, who can always find time and thought for subjects
cognate to their own special work, though not directly connected with
it. When, therefore, he was gone, his loss was felt, in this as in other
relations of life, as removing one influence of suggestive originality
and of practical soberness of judgment.
CHAPTER X.
PRIVATE LIFE AND DEATH.
Leading events of his life--General habits of work--Domesticity and
privacy of life--Acquaintances and friendships--Distaste of
publicity--Leading features of character--Personal
appearance--Failure of health--Death--Funeral in Westminster
Abbey--Erection of Memorial Statue--Conclusion.
The story of Sir Charles Barry’s life has in great measure been told in
the description of his general architectural work. For that work he
lived; and in it he found not only the occupation, but also most of the
pleasures, of his life. It is hard for those who knew and loved him best
to dissociate his memory from the recollections of his ungrudging labour
upon it, and its never-flagging interest to him. It will therefore be
necessary in this concluding chapter to give only a brief notice of his
private life and character, and a short narrative of his death and
funeral. There are many private details, treasured in the most sacred
memories of home, which would be out of place in a published biography.
Its proper record is of facts, which have general interest; of work,
which produces lasting effects; of character, so far as that character
bears upon public action and has its universal lesson.
The events of his private life were few and simple. It is said that a
nation is happy if its annals be dull: he was certainly fortunate in the
fact, that his domestic annals were singularly uneventful; he had few
troubles and difficulties, except those connected with his professional
career. In the eyes of the world his course appeared to be one of
uninterrupted and increasing prosperity. He spent the whole of his life
in London, moving in 1827 from his first house in Ely Place, to 27,
Foley Place, where his chief designs (including that for the New Palace
at Westminster) were made; thence in 1841 to 32, Great George Street, in
order to be near his great work while in progress; and lastly to Clapham
Common, when he began to retire in some degree from his more active
professional work.[119]
He never cared to leave London, except for business or for brief
recreation. A short summer run was all that he needed, and there was
perhaps some want of repose in his character, which prevented his caring
for a country life. All his interests were in town; he rejoiced in its
bustle and society; and nothing would have compensated him for a
banishment from it.
His life was pre-eminently a life of work, but work which had in it,
generally speaking, no flurry or painful anxiety--work, in fact, which
seemed a delight and almost a necessity. He always rose early; seldom
later than six o’clock, and often at four or five. He did so naturally
and habitually; in this habit probably lay much of the secret of his
freshness in work and freedom from all feverish and restless
excitability, even at his busiest and most anxious times. Whatever his
troubles or occupations might be, he could always fall asleep at night,
and, thanks to his excellent constitution, sleep was to him sound and
refreshing. But, as soon as nature was satisfied, the mind resumed its
activity, and in the early hours of morning there came back the whole
flood of anxieties and conceptions, which defied the power of sleep and
demanded immediate execution. It was well that this was his habit,
excepting when, in times of great excitement or difficulty, it led him
to overtask his strength. For in the time of his fullest work these
morning hours were the only ones, on which he could reckon with
certainty, and to these he traced many of the best of his ideas. He
experienced to the full, what most early risers know, that some of the
brightest thoughts belong to the very hour of waking, often solving in
the first freshness of the morning a difficulty, which had perplexed or
conquered him over-night. At all times, but in those morning hours
particularly, his rapidity of execution was something marvellous. He
himself was hardly conscious of any unusual power in this respect, and
would expect of others what he felt that he could do himself. Of trouble
he was utterly unsparing: he would think nothing of sponging out a whole
elevation, if an idea occurred to him, by which he thought that it could
be improved, even in details. Of any principal feature of a great work
the number of designs would be almost endless. Like most hard workers,
he was to a great extent superior to interruption. In fact, for the most
part he liked society during the time of his work. He would even listen
to reading, or join in conversation, without allowing the secondary
currents thus generated to interfere with the main stream of thought.
The interruptions of business or necessity never seemed to break the
thread of his ideas; seldom to flurry or discompose him. For he had this
mark of readiness and clearness of conception, that he was capable, on
the one hand, of setting to work at any moment, and resuming it, after
interruption, just as if no interruption had occurred, and capable, on
the other, of throwing it all aside at proper times, and joining in
recreation or social intercourse with all the lightheartedness of a
schoolboy. But for this readiness and elasticity of mind he could never
have gone through the extraordinary amount of labour, which came upon
him daily for many years.
On the general method of that work something has been already quoted (on
page 86), from the words of one eminently qualified to judge. It
frequently happened (it was so in the case of the design for the New
Palace at Westminster), that the first sketch, which he made, contained
all the essential features of the design as actually carried out. Such
sketches, however, were eminently artistic in effect, and they would
have been even apt to mislead, had they not been immediately brought to
the test of accurate scale-drawing, and enlarged details. When this was
done, either by his own hand or by the hands of others, the task of
modification and alteration would begin, generally, however, tending
after much labour to realise more fully and perfectly the conceptions at
first roughly shadowed out. Occasionally it was otherwise, especially
in later years, when it can hardly be doubted that his fastidiousness of
taste became excessive, leading to alterations, sometimes almost
inconsistent with the original design, and securing minute improvements
at too high a cost. But his most successful works were those in which
the original idea predominated to the last; for they naturally had both
the unity of original conception, and the effect of careful study in
every detail.
His tendency was perhaps to do too much for himself, and to delegate too
little of important work to the many who would have gladly helped him.
If he did delegate anything, he was impatient to have it finished; and
what Sir Charles expected to be done in “a couple of hours” became a
proverb in his office. But it was hard to complain of one who never
spared himself, and there were few who did not learn energy and actual
delight in work under the shadow of his example. In spite, therefore, of
the extent of his requirements and of a very determined will, which he
never allowed to be questioned, he always met with cheerful and ready
help, and there arose up among his assistants a strong _esprit de
corps_, not without enthusiasm for their chief.[120]
The early mornings till breakfast time, and the evening hours from eight
o’clock till (at the earliest) eleven or twelve, were devoted to the
drawing-board; the day from ten to five to superintendence of buildings
in progress and to various business. This was his regular work; but
during the time of the preparation of the competition drawings for the
New Palace he hardly gave himself more than four or five hours’ sleep
out of the twenty-four. Work, however, simply as work, never seemed to
overtask his powers; it was not till anxieties and disappointments were
added to it, that he began to feel the strain. It was rare, even when
his strength began to fail, that he complained of its pressure: it
seemed to him the natural object of life, and in it certainly lay for
him the secret of happiness as well as success.
His habits of life were simple and domestic. He lived very much at home
in the society of his wife and children, especially during the later
years of his life. That home was pervaded by the spirit of intellectual
work and energy which distinguishes the homes of professional men, and
all its inmates felt the direct influence of its architectural
atmosphere. Of his sons, two, Charles and Edward, followed his own
profession. The former was at work independently, and the latter acted
as his coadjutor, till he began to retire from the more active exercise
of his profession. Their career he watched with peculiar interest, and
his advice and aid were always at their command. In their names he sent
in his last great architectural design,--the Plan of the Westminster
Improvements, elsewhere referred to. Of his other sons, two, Godfrey
and John, were engaged, the one in surveying, the other in engineering
work, and so followed paths of life not wholly different to his own. So
far therefore his family life still reflected something of the
professional thought and feeling, which elsewhere absorbed his interest.
But into any successes, which his sons achieved, he entered with a
special liveliness of satisfaction, and his home relations were those of
almost unbroken happiness and affection.
But although this was the case, few men had less of a recluse character.
His mind was singularly open to favourable impressions of strangers, and
his own free and genial manner tended to draw them to him, and elicit
their most attractive qualities. His judgment of character was certainly
not severe or critical, and he occasionally suffered much from taking
men at their own valuation.
To young artists, especially to young architects, he was always ready to
show appreciation and kindness. In their case he laid aside the severity
of criticism, which he indulged in relation to the works of established
reputation: he was rather inclined to overrate incipient talent, and was
always glad to meet it with encouragement and advice.
But indeed any stranger who presented himself, as an unappreciated
artist or an unknown discoverer, was sure of a favourable reception.
Foreigners especially made their way with him, for he always liked the
greater freedom and liveliness of Continental manners and character.
This openness to influence remained in him to the last, very little
corrected by experience, pushed even to the verge of credulity, often
leading him into positions which had a tendency to compromise
himself.[121] It is almost needless to add, that it was taken advantage
of by unscrupulous persons, who received help and benefit from him in
the time of urgent need, and turned afterwards to vilify the giver.
But although he was thus accessible to strangers, although no one could
enjoy more the change and relaxation of society, and although he had
many acquaintances in all ranks of life, he had few friends: with their
society, added to that of his own family, he was perfectly contented.
Perhaps with only one friend (Mr. Wolfe) had he any great and constant
intimacy, for with him he could share the one great interest which
absorbed his thoughts. Night after night Mr. Wolfe would spend with him,
while the work of design was going on, always ready to give
encouragement, suggestion, and criticism. And this community of artistic
interest naturally developed itself into a general community of thought
and feeling, not uncommon in youth, but rarely preserved in manhood and
age.
Connected with these traits of character was a great, and (I think) an
excessive, dislike of all public display. He had a keener sense of the
conventionality and hollowness, which generally attach to it, than of
the substantial reality, on which after all it must be based, or of the
important functions which it performs. It was difficult to induce him to
take, on any public occasion, the part required of him, by his
connection with public bodies or by his own professional position; he
shrank from the necessity of a speech or a lecture, even on subjects on
which he might have spoken with authority.
It is probable that this feature of his character was inseparably
connected with his energy of work and eminently practical tastes; but it
was certainly unfortunate in its effects. It isolated him greatly from
his professional brethren, and this isolation, on the one hand,
prevented his exercising the full influence of his position, and on the
other, deprived him of an interchange of thought and opinion, which
might have told with advantage upon his own mind. The effect of this
isolation perhaps increased as time went on, when new styles were rising
up in architecture, and much of the work, to which his life had been
devoted, was disparaged or decried. He was not indeed shaken in his old
architectural creed; he believed that, in spite of the originality and
talent displayed in the rising generation of architects, there was in
much of their work a violation of first principles, which would
eventually be felt as fatal. This conviction, and the natural vigour and
buoyancy of his character, enabled him to show a bold front to all
attacks, and go on, in disregard of them, in the path which he thought
the right one. But he nevertheless felt them keenly. Like most men of
high spirits, he was subject to periods of depression, which told more
on his constitution than any amount of labour. And at such times,
although, as has been seen, he received the most generous support from
the members of his profession, he could but feel that in some respects
he stood alone.
Such was the general tenour of his life, which at once reflected his
natural character, and reacted upon it.
It must, of course, be left to others to pronounce on his artistic
qualities, and to judge of the results which they produced. But it may
be well to refer to the intellectual characteristics by which his mind
seemed pre-eminently distinguished. One was a remarkable quickness of
conception, which was intuitive on his own subjects, but which did not
fail him even upon others. This quickness occasionally appeared to
supersede any long abstract study. Not indeed that he would not spend
infinite pains in maturing his conception, but these were given to
practical developments and variations, which might be what
mathematicians call “Formulas of Verification,” rather than to search
for authorities and abstract reflection upon principles. I imagine that
such half-unconscious intuition is characteristic of the artistic
temperament, and doubt whether even Shakspere or Turner grasped, in
abstract theory, those principles, which have been most truly discovered
and commented upon in their works.
Joined to this quickness there was in him a remarkable fertility of
design and contrivance. If a plan proved impracticable, if a design was
rejected, the failure never seemed to disconcert him. Like the English
infantry, he “never knew when he was beaten,” and his scattered forces
were rallied instantly to another attack. This fertility was stimulated
by an indestructible power of taking interest in the minutest details,
and of despising all trouble in the search after perfection, whether it
were in the design of a Victoria Tower, or the alteration and
realteration of a drawing-room drapery. And it was perhaps supported by
that resolution to have his own way, good humoured but determined, of
which he was not untruly accused. For he was entirely, almost amusingly,
unconscious that it had anything to do with any personal characteristic
or any assertion of individual will. It seemed to him to be dictated by
an artistic necessity, so strong that it was hardly possible to oppose
it. The very readiness with which the ideas occurred seemed to him a
guarantee that they were reasonable and almost self-evident, and why
they did not occur to others, or why, when suggested, they did not
commend themselves to others, he could not understand.
With these characteristics were naturally united a sanguine disposition
and a quick temper. That sanguineness was of course tempered, and even
over-clouded, by experience of life, and it had its period of natural
reaction, when all things seemed gloomy to him, and he would pronounce
his own powers a mere pretence and his life a failure. These periods
acted upon, and suffered reaction from, his bodily health, and in them
work was his best relief. Some excitability of temper belongs to such
disposition, but there were few whom one could more truly describe as
“Irasci celerem, tamen ut placabilis esset.”
For openness and geniality were leading characteristics in his mind. He
delighted in society, and in society of men of all characters and
occupations; and those who do this are not likely to treasure up morbid
views of men or of actions.
Closely connected indeed with this excitability was his appreciation of
fun and even good-humoured mischief, and his power of entering into
interests, trivial or sportive in themselves. He would take trouble and
show eagerness, even in the amusements of his home circle, and be
anxious that they should be carried out in the best possible way. And,
even to the last, he preserved much of the impulsive freshness and
youthfulness of his character, without any sign of the narrowing and
chilling influence of age.
But these qualities in him were not exaggerated into exclusive
prominence. The imaginative and the practical, the powers of sanguine
impulse and prudential action in detail, were remarkably blended in his
mind. Thus he was on the one hand emphatically an artist. Before all
things he placed the power of imagination and creation, the sense of
beauty, and the reverence for Art which could minister to that sense, in
all the forms which it assumed, in painting, sculpture, and music, as
well as in architecture. I think indeed that he required the æsthetic
influence to clothe itself in visible artistic form; for the beauty of
Nature in itself, and the forms of the imagination clothed merely in the
words of poetry, were not the influences which laid strongest hold upon
his mind. But the claims of Art were paramount, and the realisation of
what was beautiful in it was to him the chief good, independent of all
other results. Yet, on the other hand, he was emphatically a “man of
business;” he had all the power of quick practical observation,
clearness and decision in details, willingness to accept the necessity
of prosaic work and drudgery, which belong to this character. The two
elements in his mind harmonized, and did not clash with each other.
In the same way he was impulsive and almost rash, in the ventures he
would make, and the risks he would run. The spirit of “speculation”
might easily have been developed in him, even to a dangerous prominence.
Difficulties he not only made light of, but he was often incapable of
perceiving their full force, if it would have been fatal to a cherished
idea. Yet in his execution of his schemes he could bring into play the
powers of good sense, caution, and watchfulness, to make sure of every
step, and to prevent divergence into the shadowy regions of the
impracticable.
The same union of balancing elements of character was seen in regard of
external influence upon him. His mind was certainly original, and his
resolution and will most determined. Yet to external influences, direct
and indirect, even to the tone of feeling and character of those who
were with him, he was as certainly sensitive. Suggestion or criticism,
warning or encouragement, he readily, almost unconsciously, took in, and
seemed to assimilate, till they formed a part of his own mind. In
respect of his own art, however, this susceptibility to external
influence produced no inconsistency, for its results were fused under
the power of his original conception, and therefore, while they
prevented anything fantastic and whimsical, they did not weaken the
vigour which belongs to self-reliance. In fact it was one of the causes
of that progressiveness of mind, which was always remarked in him, and
to which allusion has already been made. He had a firm grasp of certain
great principles; therefore he had the power to appreciate and to
assimilate knowledge, from whatever sources it came. He was fettered by
no system of rules; therefore he had the elasticity of mind, without
which it is impossible to profit by external influence and teaching. To
the last he confessed himself a learner. Sometimes, indeed, he would
take up some new idea suggested from without, with characteristic
eagerness, and begin to develope from it inferences, which were to yield
a new store of first principles. But when these first principles were
carefully scanned, they were found to be “old friends under a new face;”
and so the new modification was accepted, while the essential ideas
remained substantially the same. His works, accordingly, though they
showed progressiveness, were always characteristic, and had a certain
unity, which no competent eye can fail to discern.
Much indeed of his success and his power of influence depended on this
union of apparently opposite elements, on this absence of one-sidedness
and distortion of character. It was not produced in him by the deepening
and enlarging influence of abstract study. Even in his own art his
knowledge was gained mainly by experience, and he studied best with the
pencil in his hand. But in other fields of thought, he had in him very
little of the student. His interest indeed was wide and keen enough, but
it showed itself in quickness of observation and intuition, rather than
in any profound study. Even from politics he to a great extent stood
aloof, though he was consistently attached to the Liberal party, and his
mind was certainly more innovating than conservative. Science (as has
been said) interested him far more than literature. Had he not been
distinguished as an artist, he might well have made himself a name in
mechanical science, in which his great fertility of contrivance, his
love of enterprise, and his tendency to set aside stereotyped systems
and conventional rules, would have found a congenial field of exercise.
By this temperament, naturally buoyant and elastic, by the power of a
disposition warm-hearted and capable of enthusiasm, by his remarkable
determination of will, when once his mind was made up, and by the fact
that, before he had come to a determination, he was singularly open to
suggestion, by the resolution never to put up, even in little things,
with what was defective or erroneous, he mostly prevailed. Clients,
colleagues, even superiors, generally let him have his own way; for they
felt that his determination was at least conscientious and
disinterested. In his professional work especially, although he made
mistakes and miscalculations, which might cause hardship, and sometimes,
it may be, practical injustice, his determination was sustained by an
integrity above all suspicion. Architects and engineers, dealing with
large sums, the expenditure of which they alone are able to control or
criticize, are frequently exposed to solicitation, and even temptation,
to relax vigilance and show personal favour at the expense of justice.
Even a high rank in the profession does not secure men against the
exertion of this influence, and few young beginners are spared the
experience of it. It is well that, especially at the present time, the
profession at large stands strong in known integrity, though the
exercise of the vigilance and determination, which it requires, is often
a thankless work. Of that integrity Sir Charles Barry did his duty in
setting an example. Though he had many enemies, none even ventured on a
breath of slander in this respect.
That he was ambitious cannot be questioned. There are two kinds of
ambition; there is the desire of glory in itself, which seems to be its
lower form; we find a higher ambition in the desire of doing something,
which is not unworthy of glory, whether it obtains it or not. I think he
felt both strongly. For praise and reputation are the chief secondary
rewards of an artistic life, the compensation for foregoing the more
material returns, which can be best obtained in other walks of life. But
he lived long enough to feel, what all experience of life teaches, the
capricious manner in which such reward is bestowed, and the
insufficiency of it, even when it is obtained in the fullest measure. At
no time would he have sacrificed to it the higher ambition of doing that
which was artistically the best, though it might draw down a storm of
unpopularity and censure. Whenever the lower ambition is thus clearly
subordinated, it must be regarded as an instinct of humanity, capable
of giving force and life to the character, without the excitability and
selfishness which mark its exclusive predominance.
The whole remembrance of his life is therefore one of work, simplicity,
geniality, and vigour, guided by a conscientious devotion to duty, and
kindled by a never-failing enthusiasm. Without these qualities, his
artistic feeling, his power of origination and enterprise, and his
genius for design, must have failed in the work and trials of life.
His personal appearance was a fair index of his character. The
frontispiece, and the statue in the New Palace at Westminster, show the
remarkably fine head, which indicated intellectual and artistic power,
and the strong and almost sturdy figure, which was no bad type of his
determination of character; but they cannot show the mobility of his
expression, or that quick lighting up of the whole face, showing his
delight in fun and warm geniality of feeling, which in his younger days
aided the impression of his handsome features and bright complexion, and
at all times gave a remarkable charm to his manner. He was one of those
men who hardly seem to grow old. He came within five years of our “three
score years and ten,” and yet he seemed young still, and it was almost
impossible to connect with him the idea of weakness or decay.
But, when the last stone of the Victoria Tower was laid, when the
flagstaff to surmount it was all but ready, his work was done, and his
career drew to its close.
His constitution, originally one of remarkable strength, had been tried
severely by work, and still more by anxiety and disappointment. The
troubles connected with the New Palace at Westminster, not only in the
Remuneration controversy, and in the many personal contests which arose
out of the work, but in the fashion, which prevailed at one time, of
constant depreciation of the work itself, and reflexions upon the
architect, told much upon him. That much of this was ignorant he knew;
that it would pass away he fully believed; but he felt it
notwithstanding, for his disposition craved for sympathy and
appreciation, and its sensitiveness was not dulled by age.
The effects were seen, not so much in any general weakness of health or
appearance of decaying strength, as in sudden and violent attacks of
illness. The first occurred in 1837, after the excessive work of the
preparation of the design for the New Palace; and, as years and labours
grew upon him, they became more frequent, till in 1858 he had so severe
an attack of fever, that for some time his life was in imminent danger.
But this seemed to pass away; he recovered much of his health and
spirits, and preserved in great degree the elasticity and youthfulness
of his nature. His strength, vigour, and keenness of interest in all
around him were as strong as ever.
The end came most suddenly and unexpectedly. He had suffered for some
time from a cough, which no remedy appeared to touch, but which
nevertheless was thought to present no appearance of danger. On the 12th
of May, 1860, he had been with Lady Barry to spend the afternoon at the
Crystal Palace, and had seemed very calm and cheerful, speaking of the
natural dispersion of their children, and of the end of life, in which
they should be thrown upon each other, as at its beginning. The evening
had been spent as usual, and at the regular time, about eleven o’clock,
he had retired to his dressing-room. There he was seized with difficulty
of breathing and pain; and, before any of his children could be
summoned, almost before it was known that there was imminent danger, all
was over. It was found afterwards that the cause of death was a weakness
of action both in the lungs and in the heart. Death might have come
suddenly at any moment. That he had felt some vague presentiment of it
was shown by his having put his affairs in order early in the year. But
it is doubtful whether he was conscious of its actual approach. It was a
cause of thankfulness for his sake that it came so painlessly, and that,
though his children, to their great grief, were absent, his wife was
with him to the end.
It had been intended by his family that his funeral should be private,
conducted in accordance with the privacy and simplicity of his life. But
almost immediately the chief members of his profession expressed a wish
that his body should be laid in Westminster Abbey, among the
“representative men” of the country. The idea was readily taken up,
especially in the Institute of British Architects. A deputation from
that body waited on the Dean, who willingly accorded the needful
permission, and it was settled that his body should be laid in the nave.
It was but recently that Literature had been so honoured in the person
of Lord Macaulay, and Science in the person of Robert Stephenson. Close
by the side of the latter the new grave was opened.
The funeral took place on May 22nd (the day before his sixty-fifth
birth-day). The family procession, moving from Clapham, was met at
Vauxhall Bridge by the carriages containing the members of the Institute
and other distinguished persons, and by a large body of workmen engaged
in his works at the New Palace and elsewhere, who had requested
permission to follow him to the grave. So augmented, it moved on to the
Abbey.
“All the gentlemen who were to take part in the procession, and who
numbered between 400 and 500 representatives of the great societies of
arts and science in England, assembled in places adjoining the
cloisters, and there awaited the arrival of the funeral _cortége_. The
hearse reached Dean’s-yard a few minutes before 1 o’clock, and the
coffin was borne through the old cloisters to the side entrance of the
nave, where the Dean and Chapter, headed by the choir, were waiting. The
procession was then formed, and to Purcell’s solemn anthem, ‘I am the
resurrection and the life,’ moved slowly up the nave. First came the
High Bailiff of Westminster, then the beadsmen, vergers, and choir,
followed by the Dean and Chapter, and the coffin. There were eight
pall-bearers--Sir Charles Eastlake, President of the Royal Academy; the
Chief Commissioner of Works, the Right Hon. W. Cowper, M.P.; Mr. G. P.
Bidder, President of the Institute of Civil Engineers;
Lieutenant-General Sir E. Cust; the President of the Architectural
Museum, Mr. A. J. Beresford Hope; the Dean of St. Paul’s; the President
of the Royal Institute of British Architects, Mr. C. R. Cockerell; and
Mr. Tite, F.R.S., M.P. Immediately following the body the five sons of
the deceased walked as chief mourners, with the Dean of Chichester and
other private friends of the late Sir Charles. To these succeeded a
procession of immense length, which took nearly a quarter of an hour to
file slowly into the Abbey, and for the members of which there was
scarcely sufficient accommodation either in the choir or in the nave.
The House of Commons was represented by Lord John Manners, Mr. J.
Greene, Mr. R. S. Gard, Sir Joseph Paxton, Sir S. M. Peto, Sir A. Hood,
Mr. F. V. Hume, and Mr. J. Locke. Among the Council and members of the
Royal Academy were Messrs. T. Creswick, A. Elmore, J. H. Foley, S. A.
Hart, J. R. Herbert, G. Jones, J. P. Knight, Sir E. Landseer, Messrs. C.
Landseer, D. Maclise, P. Macdonall, W. C. Marshall, B. W. Pickersgill,
F. R. Pickersgill, J. Phillip, D. Roberts, R. Redgrave, C. Stansfield,
S. Smirke, R. Westmacott, and Professor Partridge. Among the associates
were also Messrs. T. L. Cooper, W. Frost, P. F. Poole, E. W. Cooke, F.
Goodall, G. G. Scott, B. O’Neil, R. G. Lane, and J. T. Willmore. Of the
Council and members of the Royal Society there were the Rev. J. Barlow,
Sir Roderick Murchison, Messrs. J. P. Guest, C. R. Weld, J. P. Gassiott,
and R. W. Walton. The Council of the Institute of Civil Engineers was
represented by Messrs. C. H. Gregory, T. Hawksley, J. Locke, M.P., Sir
J. Rennie, F.R.S., Messrs. J. Simpson, C. Manby, F.R.S., T. H. Wyatt, J.
Hawkshaw, F.R.S., J. R. Maclean, J. Cubitt, J. E. Errington, J. E.
Harrison, J. D. Hemans, J. Murray, &c.; and the Council of the
Architectural Museum by Messrs. E. Street, J. Clarke, R. Brandon, E.
Christian, Rev. T. Scott, Messrs. G. Scharf, H. D. Chantrell, W. Slater,
and J. Gibson. Of the Council and members of the Institute of British
Architects there were Messrs. G. Godwin, F.R.S., T. L. Donaldson, M. D.
Wyatt, V.P.S., J. H. Lewis, J. Bell, F. C. Penrose, F. J. Francis, G.
Morgan, R. A. Romeau, J. H. Stevens, G. Vulliamy, B. Ferrey, C. C.
Nelson, J. Norton, Sir W. Farquhar, J. J. Scoles, I. Angell, H. Ashton,
I. Bellamy, J. B. Bunning, D. Burton, F.R.S., C. Fowler, H. Kendall, D.
Mocatta, A. Salvin, O. Jones, J. Pennethorne, and about 150 other
members of the Institute and profession.
“Among the others attending were the Earl of Carlisle, the Duchess of
Sutherland, Archdeacon Hale, Mr. A. Austin, of the Board of Works; Mr.
Winkworth, Society of Arts; Mr. A. W. Franks, Society of Antiquaries;
Mr. Henry Ottley, Society for the Encouragement of Fine Arts; the Hon.
Arthur Gordon, &c.
“As many as could be accommodated in the choir having taken their seats,
the solemn service proceeded by the choir’s chanting with melancholy
impressiveness Handel’s ‘I know that my Redeemer liveth,’ and the
mournful cadences of Purcell’s 90th Psalm. The Dean then read the
lesson, after which the choir again sang, ‘When the ear heard,’ &c. The
procession was then reformed, and moved slowly to the side of the grave
amid the most solemn silence.
“At the edge of this the coffin was deposited while the choir chanted in
a subdued tone Croft’s touching anthem, ‘Man that is born of woman has
but a short time to live,’ and ‘In the midst of life we are in death.’
The coffin was then slowly lowered to its last resting place, amid the
unrestrained emotion of the mourners and friends. The Dean then
proceeded with the rest of the service, which was listened to with the
most profound silence, broken only by the sharp harsh rattle of the
earth as it was strewed on the coffin. The choir then chanted ‘I heard a
voice from Heaven,’ and still more impressively the anthem, ‘His body is
buried in peace, but his name liveth for evermore.’ The ceremony
concluded with the benediction pronounced by the Dean, and the solemn
music of the Dead March rang through the Abbey, while the relatives and
friends pressed forward to take a last glimpse of all that remained of
the gifted Sir Charles Barry. A flag was hoisted in the Victoria Tower
half-mast high during the day, and, as long as that tower stands, its
great founder will need no other memorial of his fame with
posterity.”[122]
The funeral arrangements were such as to avoid all that could jar on
the solemnity of the occasion--an occasion never to be forgotten by
those who took part in it. It was impossible not to feel the sincere and
generous sympathy, which had assembled all the representatives of the
art and science of England to do honour to his memory, and the strong
personal feelings of respect and friendship, which mingled with the
public demonstration, and gave it warmth and substance. The foresight of
it would often have been full of support and comfort to him; the reality
was deeply felt by those who followed him to the grave.
The following resolutions from the Institute of British Architects, and
the Architectural Society, were evidences of the kindly sympathy of his
professional brethren:--
“The Royal Institute of British Architects, impressed with the loss
which the profession and the country have sustained through the
decease of Sir Charles Barry, whose genius has conferred great
lustre upon this age, hereby record their profound sympathy with
the affliction which has fallen (more immediately) upon the widow
and family of their lamented friend.”
“The Committee of the Architectural Museum desire to express their
sense of the severe loss which Art has sustained by the demise of
Sir Charles Barry, an architect whose fame was the property of his
country, and indeed of the world. They desire also to express their
feeling of their own personal loss in him, who as one of their
Trustees, and as a cordial supporter of the Museum, had
conciliated the respect and regard of all who knew him. They beg in
the last place to offer the expression of their most sincere
sympathy and condolence to his family, and request the President to
transmit the message to them.”
These resolutions were but the concentrated expressions of the warm and
kindly feeling manifested at the meeting of the Institute on May 22nd.
On that occasion a paper was read by M. Digby Wyatt, Esq., V.P., “On the
Architectural Career of Sir Charles Barry,” remarkable alike for the
accuracy and fulness of its sketch of events, and for the generous
spirit of appreciation and respect which animates its thought. It may,
perhaps, be permitted me to quote its conclusion here:--
“I know not how any moral, that the ablest rhetorician in the world
could draw from Sir Charles Barry’s professional career, could be
made to speak more strongly, or admonish us more stringently, than
the facts of his life and the monuments which he has left behind
him, do for us unerringly, if we will but open our hearts to
apprehend and study them aright. His incessant labours, first to
learn and then to practise, again to learn and again to practise,
and again, and again, and again to learn and practise, so long as
his physical energies could support the activity of his intellect,
ought to convey to us all a lesson of profound humility, and a
stimulus to exertion of the most active kind.
“If he, with all his natural genius and aptitude for art, could
achieve success, in the measure in which he did achieve it, only by
never-ending and still beginning toil and study, how can we emulate
even an approximation to his excellence in our art, without an
exercise of both? His life is surely another practical illustration
of that which the lives of the greatest artists who ever lived--of
Titian, of Michael Angelo, of Raffaelle, of Leonardo da Vinci, of
Albert Durer--already bear witness to: that study and practice must
in art ever go hand-in-hand. Study without practice will but make
the pedant; practice without study can but multiply busy
worthlessness.”
These tributes to his memory, coming as they did from those who could
speak with authority, have a special value of their own; with all
allowances for the kindly feelings of the moment, they may be accepted
as a substantial and enduring testimony. At the time, perhaps, a tribute
of respect, at least as much felt and appreciated, was marked by the
voluntary attendance at his funeral of the workmen who had helped to
carry out his works. His family felt themselves justified (in their
letter of thanks to the workmen) “in recognising in that attendance, not
only a kind and cordial sympathy with their own sorrow, but also a proof
of the respect with which his memory was regarded, and of the pride and
interest felt, in having aided to accomplish what his genius had
conceived.” And what was true of the workmen was still more true of
those who had been his subordinates in the work, and had laboured
cordially and efficiently in the service. He had inspired the sympathy
which always attends on enthusiasm and self-sacrificing labour in a
great cause.
A kindly notice in the ‘Saturday Review’ (of May 19th, 1860) may be
added appropriately here, as expressing the feeling of the educated
public on the occasion:--
“The death of Sir Charles Barry, at a moment when he appeared in the
full enjoyment of life and intellect, is a severe public, no less than
an artistic loss. We are glad to learn that his claims as one of the
worthies of the age are to be recognised by a public funeral, and a
resting-place beneath the vault of Westminster Abbey.... It is
undeniable that Sir C. Barry has not been for many years popular with
officials; but we are not inclined to think the worse of him on that
account. He was through life a man of large and expansive ideas, and of
resolute determination to carry out those ideas; and, as might be
supposed, he was continually in collision alike with red-tape officials,
and the economic bullies of supply-nights. Season after season a raid at
Sir C. Barry was a sure card for a little cheap popularity in the House
of Commons.... His Prize design in its first conception embodied a great
mistake, the adaptation of Tudor forms to an Italian mass. Time rolled
on, and the great Gothic Renaissance came into existence, owing in a
great degree to this very competition. Barry was not the man to cling to
an inferior and antiquated design from false shame or blindness to the
movement of the age. The world was learning its lesson, and he conned
that lesson with the world.... His death at this time, when he was
gradually retiring from the more active pursuit of his profession, was,
in one respect, as great a loss as if he had been carried off in the
height of his more youthful labours. At a moment when the battle of the
styles is running the risk of creating an _odium architectonicum_, and
when the pernicious heresy is blossoming in influential quarters, that
the dignity, the ornament, and the convenience of a metropolis are no
concern of a great nation and an imperial legislature, we cannot well
afford to miss the man who, from his position, talents, and age, could
speak upon architectural questions with somewhat of the authority of a
Nestor.”
The feelings excited by his death naturally gave rise to the desire of
some external memorial of him in the scene of his architectural labours.
The idea was taken up by many, chiefly by his old and kind friends
Professor Donaldson and Mr. Wolfe, and it was warmly aided by the Duke
of Newcastle, the most constant of all his official patrons and
supporters. No monument could be erected in the over-crowded Abbey--a
simple memorial brass has been placed by his family to mark his
resting-place in the nave. Permission was therefore sought and granted
for the erection of a statue in the New Palace. It was desired to place
it in St. Stephen’s Porch, near the point which marks one of the chief
features of the design--the utilisation of Westminster Hall as the grand
entrance to the building, by the splendid arch and staircase at its
southern end. This position, by which the main stream of people flows,
was refused. The only one which could be obtained was at the foot of the
public staircase leading to the upper range of Committee rooms from the
“Witness Hall,” one public enough, but not very central, nor very well
adapted to the exhibition of the statue in itself.
A subscription was opened, in which his family was allowed to take no
part, in order that the memorial might be one from his personal friends
and his professional brethren. The work was entrusted to Mr. Foley. The
result is the statue, which is now placed in the position assigned to
it--admirable as a work of art, and excellent as a representation of the
original. It is the more remarkable, inasmuch as it was not taken from
life, or even from a cast of the face after death. The only materials
were a good bust by Behnes, one or two photographs, and the sculptor’s
own personal recollections. The work which Mr. Foley has produced from
these materials, by the fine outline of the head, and the expression of
vigour and energy in the face, has the merit of giving to strangers the
idea of a man who could deserve and achieve eminence. It has the hardly
inferior merit of bringing back its original very simply and very
effectively to those who knew him.
It is but right that it should find some place in the building to which
he devoted so much labour and skill, for which he gave up so much of his
life. But the principle of the old “Si monumentum quæris, circumspice”
has its application to him also. He can need no monument in
Westminster. His works remain; by them he would have wished to be
judged; to them both now, and even more hereafter, when lapse of time
has given value and solidity to men’s judgment, his reputation may
safely be left.
APPENDIX.
CONTENTS.
(A.) LIST OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGNS.
(B.) LETTER TO HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS THE PRINCE CONSORT AS
TO THE SOUTH KENSINGTON SCHEME.
(C.) PAPERS ON THE REMUNERATION CONTROVERSY.
(_a._) LETTER OF THE ARCHITECT TO THE NEW PALACE
COMMISSIONERS IN 1849.
(_b._) TREASURY MINUTE OF FEBRUARY, 1854.
(_c._) REPLY OF SIR C. BARRY, MARCH, 1854.
(_d._) LETTER OF J. M. WHITE, ESQ., JULY, 1855.
(_e._) TREASURY MINUTE OF JANUARY, 1856.
(_f._) REPLY OF SIR C. BARRY OF FEBRUARY, 1856.
(_g._) CONCLUSION OF TREASURY MINUTE OF JULY, 1856.
(_h._) BRIEF REMARKS OF SIR C. BARRY, 1856.
(D.) LIST OF SUBSCRIBERS TO THE MEMORIAL STATUE.
(A.)
LIST OF ARCHITECTURAL DESIGNS OF SIR C. BARRY, R.A.
[THE designs marked with an asterisk are known not to have been carried
out at all; others may have been also fruitless. The date given is that
of the first occurrence of the design in his diaries; in many cases the
design was altered, or recurred to after being set aside.]
* Newington Church 1821
Prestwich Church 1822
Campfield Church, Manchester 1822
St. Martin’s Outwich 1822
Ringley Chapel 1822
Oldham Church 1823
Brighton Church (St. Peter’s) 1824
Royal Institution of Fine Arts at Manchester 1824
Saffron Hill Chapel and Schools 1824
Sussex County Hospital 1825
* Leeds Exchange 1825
* Kensington Church 1825
* Bognor Improvements 1825
Holloway Church 1825
Cloudesley Square Church 1826
Ball’s Pond Church 1826
Petworth Church Spire and Alterations 1827
Brunswick Chapel, Brighton 1827
* Drummond Castle Alterations 1827
Stoke Newington Church Alterations 1827
* Law Institution 1828
* New Concert Room at Manchester 1828
* Church at Streatham 1828
* Pitt Press, Cambridge 1829
Mr. Attree’s House, Brighton 1829
Travellers’ Club 1829
* Design for Highgate Church 1830
Holloway Schools 1830
* Charing Cross Hospital 1830
Brighton Park 1830
* Birmingham Town Hall 1830
Additions to Dulwich College 1831
* Westminster Hospital 1831
* City Club 1832
Birmingham Grammar School 1833
* Manchester Club 1833
College of Surgeons Alterations 1833
* Design for National Gallery 1833
* Woburn Abbey Alterations 1834
Bowood (Alterations) 1834
* Holland House 1834
* Islington Chapel 1834
Elizabethan House, for W. Currie, Esq. 1834
Kingston Hall Alterations 1835
Stafford House Alterations 1835
Design for New Palace at Westminster, begun Aug. 23rd 1835
Manchester Unitarian Chapel 1836
Manchester Athenæum 1836
Corsham House 1836
Walton House 1837
* Worcester College, Oxford 1837
Reform Club 1837
* Buchanan House (Duke of Montrose) 1837
Highclere House 1837
Trentham Hall 1838
University College, Oxford 1839
* Petworth House Alterations 1839
Trafalgar Square 1840
* New Law Courts 1840
Kiddington Hall 1840
* Drumlanrig Castle 1840
* Pall Mall Alterations 1840
Pentonville Model Prison 1841
Colonel Fox’s House, Addison Road 1841
Dulwich College Schools 1841
Hurstpierpoint Church 1841
Piccadilly Alterations 1841
Harewood House 1842
Ambassador’s Palace at Constantinople 1842
Duncombe Park 1843
Ensham Hall 1843
* Thames Embankment 1843
Board of Trade 1844
Dunrobin Castle 1844
* New Law Courts 1844
* Horse Guards’ Alterations 1845
* Pedestal of Wellington Statue 1847
Keyham Factory 1847
Shrubland 1848
* National Gallery Alterations 1848
Gawthorpe 1849
* Royal Scottish Academy 1849
* Elvaston Castle Alterations 1849
Canford Manor 1850
Bridgewater House 1850
College of Surgeons Alterations 1850
Cliefden 1851
Dowlais Schools 1851
Edgbaston Hall (Alterations) 1852
* Northumberland House Alterations 1852
Mr. Lyon’s House 1852
* Crystal Palace Design with Domes 1852
* British Museum Alterations 1853
* Westminster Improvements 1853
* National Gallery 1853
* Royal Academy, Burlington House 1855
* Clumber 1857
* Government Offices Concentration 1857
* Duxbury Hall 1859
Halifax Town Hall 1859
(B.)
LETTER TO HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS THE PRINCE CONSORT AS TO THE SOUTH
KENSINGTON SCHEME.
Westminster, 15th October, 1853.
SIR,--In considering Your Royal Highness’s noble project and detailed
plans, for concentrating all that appertains to Art and Science in one
Institution at Kensington, certain doubts and difficulties as to the
efficient realisation of such a comprehensive project upon that site
have occurred to me, which, as a Member of the Royal Commission for the
Great Exhibition of 1851, I venture, with great respect and deference,
to submit for Your Royal Highness’s consideration, together with a
suggestion for meeting what appear to me to be the difficulties of the
case.
I entirely agree with Your Royal Highness as to the great advantages,
that would result from a concentration of such objects in one locality;
but, having regard to the particular locality in question, I fear that
it would be found to be neither convenient nor large enough for such a
comprehensive purpose.
In laying out a great city, _de novo_, if an Acropolis in its centre of
150 acres could be set apart for the purpose, or if a second Fire of
London were to afford the opportunity of appropriating that extent of
space to the object in the locality of Russell Square, the project
would, in my opinion, be not only feasible, but most desirable.
The doubts and misgivings which I entertain as to the site at Kensington
for the comprehensive purposes to which it is proposed to be applied,
are--Firstly, That it is far too much to the west for the general
convenience of the Metropolis, particularly for the industrial community
and the working-classes at the eastern and central portions of the
town. Secondly, That to carry out efficiently the principle of
concentration as regards both Art and Science, it would not be large
enough to accommodate the National Library and the entire collection of
arts and antiquities at the British Museum, which should, in my opinion,
form a part of such an institution; neither is it probable that the
Learned Societies, whose meetings are usually in the evening, would be
induced to form part of the Institution in such a distant locality.
Thirdly, That it would render several old established and popular
National Institutions, which have been erected at considerable cost,
more or less useless; such as the British Museum, the present National
Gallery and Royal Academy, the Museum of Economic Geology, and the
Society of Arts, &c. And, Lastly, The enormous and indefinite cost that
it would be necessary to incur, and the great lapse of time and
inconvenience resulting therefrom, that might, and probably would,
ensue, before such a large and costly institution would be completed, so
as to render its advantages and usefulness thoroughly available.
From a rough calculation which I have formed of the buildings shown in
Your Royal Highness’s plan for the National Gallery alone (which
contains 1900 squares of buildings--_i. e._, is 30 per cent. larger than
the entire British Museum), taking the Palace at Caserta, with which, in
point of length and proposed design, it would so nearly assimilate, as a
type of the style to be adopted--the cost would be little less than a
million and a half of money; and to erect the other buildings,
containing about 3995 squares, as shown in the same plan, within the
main roads only, in a similar style, together with the enclosure, laying
out of the ground, and formation of roads, &c., would probably cost an
additional two millions and a half.
With respect to the advantage of this site for the national pictures, as
regards immunity from soot and dust, I fear that too much importance is
attached to that circumstance, owing to the enormous neighbourhood both
existing and arising around it, and to the consequences of its position
as regards the denser portions of the Metropolis; for in the more lofty
and airy neighbourhood of Hyde Park Gardens, Westbourne Terrace, &c.,
much inconvenience is felt from the falling of blacks, particularly
during an easterly wind. From this and other considerations, I am
inclined to think that the heart of London is not more subject to the
effects of a sooty atmosphere than its immediate suburbs. All furnace
smoke is likely to be soon abated under the provisions of the recent Act
of Parliament for that purpose, and it is to be hoped that ere long such
a stigma upon Science as the continuance of a similar nuisance from open
fires will be removed. As to dust, the site at Kensington, with the open
and airy spaces and macadamized roads surrounding it, is likely, I
think, to suffer as much from that inconvenience, as the crowded and
more frequented parts of London, particularly where the streets are
paved with granite.
With reference to the capabilities of the site, in an æsthetic point of
view, its lowness and flatness are not favourable to a fine
architectural display, and the loftiness of the buildings which it is
proposed to erect upon it, if properly proportioned to their lengths,
will effectually shut out all view of the loftier background of Hyde
Park and Kensington Gardens, with their fine trees, when viewed from the
principal road out of Brompton.
Having thus described the doubts and misgivings which I entertain with
respect to the site at Kensington, and as to the possibility of carrying
out a perfect and efficient concentration of all that relates to
science, art, and literature upon that spot, I proceed to notice the
advantages and capabilities, which the existing institutions, to which I
have adverted, would offer for such purposes, conjointly with the
newly-acquired site.
FIRST.
As regards the present British Museum, which I would propose to call the
“British Museum of Arts and Literature.”
This Institution occupies the most central portion of the Metropolis;
its site is lofty and commanding; the soil good, dry, and well drained;
it is open to the north, and has 82 acres of open space in the squares
which adjoin or are immediately contiguous to it; it contains at present
1480 squares of building, and stands upon above 8-1/2 acres of ground,
which, by the addition of the surrounding property, with additional
buildings upon it, might be increased to 3269 squares of building, and
13-1/2 acres of ground; it has already cost the country little short of
a million of money; it is in a good neighbourhood, well calculated for
residences for professors and officers of the Institution, and it has
the advantage of the London University as an adjunct in its immediate
neighbourhood; it is, moreover, a very popular Institution, and its site
only requires the clearing away of a portion of the shabby neighbourhood
to the south of it, and the opening up of a new approach to it in that
direction, to render it an unexceptionable site for a great National
Institution.
I propose that this Institution should not only be devoted to Art and
Literature, but also to the accommodation of the Learned Societies. For
this purpose it would be necessary to purchase the whole of the
surrounding property, extending to Montague Street and Russell Square on
the east, to Montague Place on the north, and to Bedford Square and
Charlotte Street on the west; to cover over the quadrangle with a glass
roof, and erect additional buildings on the west side of the present
buildings, as recommended in a report, which I recently made to the
Government, with a view to increase of the accommodation within the
limits of the existing building.
The quadrangle and the ground story of the building might then be
appropriated to the antiquities; the whole of the principal floor to the
library, including the manuscripts, prints, and drawings: and the
reading-rooms and the upper floor to the national pictures, which floor,
with certain modifications that could be made at no great cost, might be
admirably adapted to receive them, and which would not only accommodate
the present collection, including the cartoons at Hampton Court, and my
namesake’s pictures at the Society of Arts, but afford space for a
future increase of it to nearly eight times its present amount, or more
than double the extent allotted to the pictures in the Louvre. To
effect these arrangements, it would be necessary to remove by degrees,
as other accommodation could be provided, the whole of the Natural
History collection, which at present occupies a large portion of the
one-pair floor, as well as other portions of the building, to
Kensington. On the surrounding property recommended to be purchased, I
would propose that as leases fall in, or otherwise by degrees, other
buildings for such progressive enlargement of the Institution, as
circumstances may render necessary, should be erected, by which the
requirements of the country in respect to Art and Literature may be met
for ages to come.
If these suggestions, as far as they relate to the limits of
the present building, were carried out immediately, it would
be necessary to incur the estimated cost of the additions
and transformations, recommended in my recent report to the
Government, amounting to £105,000
To which should be added for the requisite
modifications of the one-pair floor, in order to
adapt it for the reception of the national pictures 25,000
--------
Making a total of £130,000
According to present requirements, however, this expenditure might be
spread over a period of two or even three years; but upon such an
arrangement, as would allow of depositing the present collection of
national pictures in the rooms prepared for their reception, and
providing for the pressing wants of the library, at the end of the first
year.
The Institution, even in such a limited and incomplete state, would even
then exceed the accommodation for galleries of art and books provided by
the Parisian Bibliothèque Impériale and Louvre combined.
For the realisation of the entire project ultimately, it would be
desirable that the Government should immediately purchase the fee simple
of the whole of the property, which surrounds, and is immediately
contiguous to, the present building. It is most fortunate that this
property, at present belongs entirely to one freeholder, a noble duke,
whose liberality and patriotism are proverbial, and who therefore would
probably feel disposed to part with his interest in it for public
purposes at a moderate amount. The sum that would be required to acquire
this property, and cover it with the buildings to which I have already
adverted, would probably amount ultimately to less than a million of
money; but, inasmuch as the accommodation to be provided for in these
suggested buildings would not at present, nor probably for a
considerable time to come, be needed, it would not be necessary or
desirable to do more now, than purchase the fee simple of the property
in question, and allow it to remain, as it is, so as to be remunerative
to the Crown, until required from time to time for the purposes which
have been proposed, leaving the expenditure upon the new buildings,
proposed to be erected upon it, to be spread over such a period of years
as may be considered prudent.
SECONDLY.
As regards the newly-acquired site at Kensington.
Upon this site I would propose that an institution should be founded, to
be called the “National Gallery of Science,” in its various application
to arts, manufactures, and commerce. For this purpose the distance of
its locality from the centre of the Metropolis is comparatively of less
importance than it would be in respect of an Institution for Art; for
the feeling of the country at large, as regards art, is still wofully
deficient, and can only be fostered and improved by placing the finest
exemplars of all ages in a central position, in the hands, as it were,
of the whole of the Metropolis, so that all of its inhabitants, and all
who visit it from the provinces, particularly the industrial and
working-classes, may have the benefit of being able constantly and
easily to inspect them, and thus become familiarised, and even imbued,
with their principles and excellence. With respect to science, the
country is already pre-eminent; and a distant locality therefore of an
institution for its encouragement is not likely to deter that portion
of the community, who are interested in it, and are anxious to profit by
its advantages, from being ready perchance to go out of the way for the
purpose.
It appears by the plan of the site at Kensington, that it consists of
about 88 acres, of which about 52 acres lie between the projected main
roads forming its principal subdivision, upon which are proposed to be
erected the National Gallery, containing 1900 squares of building, and
also the Colleges of Art and Science and the Museums of Industrial Art
and Patented Inventions, containing together 3995 squares, or in the
whole 5895 squares of building. About 10 acres of the site appear to be
devoted to roads, and the remainder, about 26 acres, to outlying plots
of ground, of irregular form, proposed for the accommodation of the
learned societies, a music hall, official residences, &c., &c. The
wedge-like form of ground towards Kensington Gore, which, although in
the midst of the site, forms no part of it, having a frontage of about
320 feet to the high-road, and extending about 1100 feet into the
principal subdivision of the ground already mentioned, is a serious
drawback upon any architectural display, that might be made towards Hyde
Park. This is less to be lamented, however, as the aspect and the point
of view from higher ground are not favourable for such a display. The
southern portion of the ground is therefore most properly proposed to be
appropriated to that object, and the proposed general distribution of
the buildings seems to me to be judiciously arranged for its attainment.
If, however, my suggestions should be considered worthy of adoption, it
would perhaps be desirable to alter the entire distribution, and it
certainly would not be necessary to provide for buildings of such a
commanding and costly character, as would be the case if the idea should
be entertained of uniting all the requirements of art, science, and
literature in one institution upon that spot. The only buildings that
would be required, according to my suggestions, would be museums for the
exhibition of zoological, botanical, and mineralogical specimens, and
for patented inventions; a menagerie for living specimens in the
department of natural history; a library of science, and theatres, with
laboratories, for public lectures in every branch of science, combined
with a botanical garden and accommodation for living specimens of the
animated kingdom; and such accommodation might in the first instance be
fully obtained within the limits of the principal plot of ground between
the proposed main roads. The off-lying plots might be held in reserve
for any future increase of the Institution that may in the course of
time be required, or a portion of them might be at once appropriated to
workshops for the practical teaching of the industrial arts.
The valuable collections in the department of Natural History at present
at the British Museum, the entire collection of the Museum of Economic
Geology, the Trade Museum of the Society of Arts, the collection of
patented inventions under the charge of the Patent Office, and possibly
one or both of the private collections of the Regents Park and Surrey
Zoological Gardens, if concentrated upon this spot, would form such a
valuable and instructive collection, as could not fail to excite a great
interest in the institution amongst all classes of the community.
It is difficult to estimate what might be the ultimate cost of such an
institution; but it is probable, I think, that much less than a million
of money would cover the amount of it. This expenditure, however, might
be spread over a course of years, and, as the institution would add so
much to public enjoyment and instruction, and would be practically so
advantageous to the arts, manufactures, and commerce of the country,
Parliament would not be likely to be backward in voting from time to
time the requisite supplies.
Such an institution, when fully carried out, might then vie with the
Jardin des Plantes, which it would much exceed in acreage, and the
Conservatoire des Arts et Métiers of the French capital combined, and
bear an honourable comparison with those noble institutions.
THIRDLY.
As regards the present National Gallery and Royal Academy of Art.
The building containing these two Institutions occupies the finest
position which London affords for architectural display, and is
unfortunately the meanest and most ineffective of its public buildings.
It stands upon rather more than an acre of ground, nearly one half of
which is wasted in the Fore Court, under a mistaken notion that it was
desirable to let in a view of the portico of St. Martin’s Church from
Pall Mall East, which, owing to the tower of the church being now seen
above it, has lost all the importance and grandeur of effect which it
formerly had when seen from Old St. Martin’s Lane.
The present edifice contains 278 squares of building, which I propose
should be increased to 448 squares, by removing the present useless
portico and other columns and projections which now break up its front,
building upon the wasted portion of its site, namely the fore court, and
placing the staircase on the site of the present sculpture-room. With
these and other additions and alterations, assuming that the national
pictures are removed, I propose that the building should be devoted
exclusively to the teaching of Art in all its branches, and the
periodical exhibition of modern works, for which purpose it should be
divided between the Royal Academy of Fine Art, and the Metropolitan
School of Design for practical and decorative Art.
The present wall space for pictures, which amounts to about 16,920
superficial feet, would, by the proposed additions and alterations,
reach 54,720 feet; and ample space would be provided for sculpture,
casts, &c., as well as for the schools, lecture-rooms, libraries, and
other accommodation required by each department, so that the business of
the schools need not be interrupted, as is now the case at the Royal
Academy, during the entire period of the annual exhibition of modern
productions.
The addition, which I would propose to make in front of the existing
building for the purpose of masking its deformity, and shutting out of
view from the south all the unsightly objects on the rising ground at
the back which are now seen above it, would be in the Italian style of
architecture, about 430 feet in length and nearly 100 feet in height,
with flanking towers about 30 feet square, rising to a height of 130
feet. The composition would consist of two orders of architecture in the
façade generally, and three in the towers, elevated upon a lofty arcaded
ground story, affording covered access to the building for carriages to
the extent of 100 feet in length. In the centre of the front in each of
the orders above the ground story I would propose open loggiæ, about 100
feet long, to enable visitors to enjoy the view to the south, and obtain
a little fresh air as a relief to the often oppressive and wearisome
effect produced by an inspection of very extensive galleries of works of
art.
The cost of such additions and alterations as I have suggested would
probably amount to about 135,000_l._, and as the Royal Academy would be
much benefited by the increased and improved accommodation that they
would afford, a portion of its funded property might fairly be required
as a contribution to that expenditure, and the remainder might be
reasonably looked for from Parliament, as being for the permanent
accommodation of a new national institution. Such a building as that
proposed, upon such a noble and commanding site as that of Trafalgar
Square, could not fail to have a very striking effect, and would
dominate over that portion of the Metropolis, as the Vatican does over
Rome.
FOURTHLY.
As regards the present Museum of Economic Geology, in Jermyn Street.
This institution occupies a good, well-frequented, and nearly central
position, and has recently been formed by the country at an expenditure
of about 40,000_l._ It contains 112 squares of building, including a
fine theatre for lectures, a mineralogical museum, and good
accommodation for various scientific purposes.
I would propose that the entire collection at this institution should be
transferred to the proposed College of Science at Kensington, and that
it should thereupon be set apart and fitted up as a National Polytechnic
Institution, for amusing and instructive demonstrations and lectures in
science, with a library and schools for engineering drawing, for the use
principally of the industrial and working classes of an evening, which,
judging from past experience in the institution itself, and the success
that attends other private institutions of a similar nature, could not,
I think, fail to become extremely popular and useful.
FIFTHLY AND LASTLY.
As regards the Society of Arts, Manufactures, and Commerce, in the
Adelphi.
This old-established Institution, being denuded, as I have
proposed, of its paintings and its Trade Museum, Library, &c.,
might be rendered useful as a place for meeting and for lectures,
principally of an evening, on all subjects connected with the
statistics of trade and commerce, &c., and a rendezvous for all,
who seek information connected therewith.
Having now enumerated the capabilities and advantages that our
existing institutions afford, conjointly with the newly acquired
site at Kensington, for the important objects to which I have
adverted, I have only to add that I have been induced to associate
Art, Literature, and Learning in one institution as being branches
of knowledge of a kindred nature illustrative of each other, and
likely to work well together, and to separate from them Science,
which has less affinity with those branches of knowledge, except in
so far as it may be applied to the useful arts and manufactures of
the country, for which the means and accommodation are proposed to
be provided at Kensington.
I am, in short, induced to recommend this separation of Art and
Science from a strong conviction that the site at Kensington is too
distant from the centre of the Metropolis, too small, and too low
for a perfect, efficient, and convenient concentration of all that
relates to both; and that it would be far better to improve and add
to the usefulness of all our existing Institutions for the
encouragement of Art, Literature, and Learning, and turn the site
at Kensington to the best account for the encouragement of
Science, particularly in its application to the arts, manufactures,
and commerce of the country, than to attempt the more comprehensive
project proposed with reference to that site, which, for the
reasons I have assigned, would I fear be likely to meet with many
financial difficulties, delays, and disappointments, and excite, as
a national institution, invidious comparisons with the newly
erected Crystal Palace, which occupies one of the most commanding
and beautiful situations in the country, and is placed in the midst
of about 280 acres of ornamental grounds, forming an institution
with objects akin to those of all our existing public institutions,
combined and wholly effected by private enterprise at an ultimate
cost of probably more than two millions of money.
I have the honour, &c.,
(Signed) CHARLES BARRY.
(C.)
PAPERS ON THE REMUNERATION CONTROVERSY.
(_a._) LETTER OF THE ARCHITECT TO THE NEW PALACE COMMISSIONERS IN 1849.
To the COMMISSIONERS appointed to superintend the Completion of the NEW
PALACE at Westminster.
Great George Street, 6th February, 1849.
MY LORD AND GENTLEMEN,--The time is now arrived, when I deem it
necessary to call your attention to a matter of great personal interest
to myself. I allude to the remuneration for my past services as
architect of the New Palace at Westminster.
As I am now in a position to prove the inadequacy of the amount of the
sum originally proposed to me, and the insufficiency of the grounds
upon which that proposition was made, I feel that I ought not any longer
delay to request an early settlement of my claims.
You are doubtless aware that the proposition originally made to me by
the Government in 1839 was, that I should receive the sum of 25,000_l._
for the labour and responsibility to be imposed upon me in the
superintendence, direction and completion of the intended edifice, and
that I was induced to accede conditionally to that proposition, in the
belief that it was made to me in the absence of a due appreciation of
the enormous extent of that labour and responsibility, and that any
attempt on my part, at that time, to prove the inadequacy of the sum
proposed would have been fruitless. I was further induced to take this
course from having then entered upon the duties of my appointment as
architect of the New Palace, for more than nineteen months, when I had
already made extensive and costly arrangements to enable me to carry on
the works; so that if, instead of acceding conditionally to the
proposition, I had adopted the alternative of relinquishing the
employment, which at the time occurred to me, I could not have done so
without a considerable sacrifice. I preferred, therefore, to postpone
all further application on the subject, until I should be in a condition
to prove incontestably the full extent of my services, and then to rely
upon the Government for a just and liberal determination of the
question.
As it is possible that you may not be acquainted with the whole of the
circumstances under which this proposition was made to me, I think it
right to trouble you with the following short narrative of the
transaction:--
When my original design for the New Palace at Westminster had been
approved, and the original estimate had been subjected to a searching
examination by the department of Woods and Works, and some discussion
also, as I was informed, had taken place in a Committee of the House of
Commons respecting my remuneration, the Government, in 1837, conferred
upon me the appointment of architect, to carry into effect that design,
but without making any stipulation whatever relative to the
remuneration for my services; and I was ordered to proceed immediately
with the work, which I accordingly commenced on the 3rd of July in that
year.
As this order was conveyed to me unconditionally, I had no reason to
doubt but that my remuneration would be of the customary amount.
On the 1st March, however, in the year 1839, I had the first official
intimation that such was not proposed to be the case, in a letter, which
I then received from the Office of Woods, enclosing a copy of a letter
to that effect from the Lords of the Treasury to the Commissioners of
Woods, &c., of the 29th of the preceding month, no explanation having
been required of me, nor any previous communication even made to me,
upon the subject.
The purport of this letter from the Lords of the Treasury was to concur
in a recommendation of the Commissioners of Woods, made in a Report to
their Lordships on the subject of my remuneration in February, 1838, and
to convey to those Commissioners the official sanction of the Government
for acting upon it. The recommendation was to the effect that the sum of
25,000_l._ would be a fair and reasonable remuneration for the labour
and responsibility to be imposed upon me in the superintendence,
direction and completion of the intended edifice; and the Commissioners
of Woods stated that they were of that opinion, after having given their
best consideration to “all the circumstances of the case, the extent and
importance of the buildings, the nature and description of the several
works, the very large expenditure contemplated in my estimate, and the
period within which it was proposed that such expenditure should be
incurred.”
After having made a fruitless application for the particulars of the
grounds upon which such recommendation was made, I was induced, for the
reasons before stated, to accede conditionally to the proposition
founded upon it, under a protest, however, as to the inadequacy of the
amount proposed, and with an intimation that I should offer proof of its
inadequacy, when the building was in such an advanced state as to allow
of a competent judgment being formed on the subject, which protest, as
well as the reiteration of it on various subsequent occasions, has never
been contested.
It will be seen that the proposition had special reference to the plans
and estimates then delivered and approved, and that the conditions of it
were based upon those documents. I could easily prove, if it were
necessary, that those conditions have been annulled by acts of the
Government, and by circumstances over which I had no control; but,
assuming for the present that they have been strictly adhered to, I am
anxious to show, not only that the grounds which have been alleged for
reducing the amount of the architect’s customary remuneration in this
case, are erroneous, but that I have been called upon, in carrying into
effect the design adopted, to do much more than is usual, or than could
have been anticipated in the ordinary discharge of my professional
duties.
In the first place the Commissioners of Woods state that they have given
their best consideration to “all the circumstances of the case.”
With all due respect for the nobleman and gentlemen who filled the
office of Commissioners of Woods at that time, I must contend, that,
from the want of professional knowledge and experience, they were
incompetent of themselves to form any just opinion on the subject, and
they did not, to my knowledge, take the opinion of any one really
competent to advise them thereon.
2ndly. They adduce “the extent and importance of the work,” as a ground
for reducing the architect’s accustomed remuneration. I submit, that the
unusual extent and importance of the work is a reason rather for
increasing than diminishing the customary remuneration of the architect,
inasmuch as his responsibilities are more than proportionally increased,
and the demands upon his taste, skill, and judgment are far greater,
than in works of less magnitude and importance. For with respect to
extensive and complicated plans, such as that of the New Palace at
Westminster, where requirements of great number and widely different
character have to be combined and arranged, with a view not only to
insure convenience in detail, but also the utmost perfection that is
attainable as a whole, it will be manifest to all, who are able to form
a correct opinion on the subject, that the labour and skill required are
immeasurably greater, than in buildings of comparatively small
dimensions, designed with reference to one single object.
3rdly. The Commissioners of Woods allude to “the nature and description
of the work” in support of their recommendation. I am not exactly aware
what meaning may have been intended to be conveyed by these remarks. If
it is meant that the skill and labour required to produce the building
in question is less than are required in other public buildings or
private works, I cannot admit the truth of such an assumption. As
however the New Palace at Westminster is now sufficiently advanced to
allow of an accurate judgment being formed as to the amount of labour,
skill, and responsibility, that has been incurred in producing it, I
invite a comparison between it and any other public building of modern
times; and I think it will be evident, even to the uninitiated, that in
point of variety of design, elaboration of details, and difficulties of
combination and construction, the labour and responsibility incurred is
much greater, than in any other modern edifice that can be mentioned.
I may here add, as a ground for an increase rather than a reduction of
the customary remuneration in respect of Public Works, that owing to the
trouble, delays, and perplexities attendant upon official communications
and requirements, the architect’s labours and anxieties are much greater
than those which he has to incur in private practice; and, if this be
true of public buildings of an ordinary character, it may be easily
conceived, that those labours and anxieties have been incomparably
greater in carrying into effect such a work as the New Palace at
Westminster, in which not only the Government, but Committees of
Parliament, and even the public, have unceasingly assumed the right of
criticism and control. As one proof, among many others that might be
adduced, of the enormous amount of labour that has already devolved upon
me, in conducting this great national work to its present state, it will
not be irrelevant to mention, that no less than between 8000 and 9000
original drawings and models have been prepared for it, a large portion
of which have emanated from my own hand, while the whole of the
remainder have been made under my own immediate direction and
supervision.
4thly. “The very large amount of expenditure contemplated” is stated by
the Commissioners of Woods as another ground for reducing the
architect’s accustomed remuneration. I submit that in a work of the
complicated and elaborate description of the New Palace at Westminster,
the amount of expenditure incurred is a fair and just criterion of the
amount of skill and labour required in producing it, and that, owing to
the number of years over which the expenditure has extended, the annual
amount upon an average has not been greater than upon other public works
erected during the same period, upon which, up to the present time, the
architect has in all cases been paid his accustomed amount of
remuneration.
The 5th and last ground alleged by the Commissioners of Woods in support
of the Government proposition is, “The period within which it was
proposed that the contemplated expenditure should be incurred.” This
ground was assigned upon the assumption that the entire edifice might be
completed within six years; but, owing to the limited portions of the
site that could from time to time be cleared, in consequence of the
necessity which has constantly existed of providing accommodation for
the business of Parliament upon a part of that site, it was found to be
impossible, particularly in the early stages of the work, to employ an
unlimited number of men, or to expend more upon an average than between
80,000_l._ and 90,000_l._ per annum. On this account, and also in
consequence of the delays and difficulties occasioned by the
extraordinary nature and extent of the warming and ventilating
arrangements, and the difficulty of complying with Dr. Reid’s
requirements in respect of them, the peculiar nature of the site, the
difficulty of obtaining accurate information as to the ever-varying
accommodation required, the delay in official communications and in
obtaining authorities, and the limitation of the supplies of late years,
the time occupied upon the works has already amounted to nearly twice
the period originally assumed for their completion; and it is obviously
impossible, while such contingencies are likely to impede their
progress, to say how much longer it will be before the entire work will
be completed.
Having now, I trust, shown the insufficiency of the grounds assigned by
the Commissioners of Woods for reducing the amount of the architect’s
customary recompense, with reference to the New Palace at Westminster, I
have to observe that not only have I, in that capacity, discharged all
those duties by which I am justly entitled to that amount of
remuneration, but I have been called upon to do more than is usual, or
than could have been anticipated. I allude particularly to the unusual
amount of labour and anxiety in carrying out, under Dr. Reid’s
direction, during a period of nearly five years, structural arrangements
for warming and ventilating the entire edifice, to an extent never
before attempted to be applied to any public building whatever, and much
beyond what I considered to be necessary. I have also been called upon
to remodel the internal fittings of the two Houses, and to vary from
time to time the arrangements and appropriation of the offices, division
lobbies, &c., of each House, owing to the changes made in the mode of
conducting the business of Parliament, and the vagueness and
insufficiency of the information afforded for the preparation of the
original design, which information, upon being reconsidered by
Committees appointed from time to time during the progress of the works,
has been found in many instances to be altogether at variance with the
requirements. Those who are aware of the consequences of making a single
alteration in one part of a large and complicated plan, and the
extensive changes to which it often leads in others, will readily
conceive, that, in order to comply with the demands above alluded to,
the entire plan and construction of the building has had to be modified
and recast over and over again, occasioning a considerable amount of
additional thought and labour, and an increase of drawings much beyond
what are required under ordinary circumstances.
I consider, therefore, that I am justly entitled to at least the
customary remuneration in respect of the outlay contemplated in the
original design and estimate; and I beg to add that the whole of the
arguments, which I have urged in favour of such remuneration, apply with
equal force to the expenditure upon extra works sanctioned by the
Government or Parliament; but to these it is scarcely necessary to
observe that the proposal for a limited amount of remuneration can have
no reference.
I consider also that I am entitled to a further remuneration for special
services not connected with my professional duties in respect of the
works of the building. These services consist of attendances upon the
Fine Arts Commission, reports and numerous drawings prepared in
compliance with the orders of that Commission, frequent communications
with its secretary, and the artists appointed for the decoration of the
interior of the New Palace; attendances upon Committees of Parliament in
every session from the year 1841 to the present time, preparing data
required by those Committees, giving and correcting of evidence, making
up voluminous returns in compliance with orders of the House of Commons
(one of which occupied myself and clerks for nearly four months);
attendances to give evidence upon two Commissions of Inquiry with
reference to Dr. Reid’s system of warming and ventilating, preparing
plans and other documents for the use of those Commissions; conferences
and communications with the Law Officers of the Crown, with reference to
contracts, disputed claims, and threatened legal proceedings; numerous
reports and estimates required from time to time by the Office of Woods,
negotiations and arrangements consequent upon the establishment of the
Government workshops at Thames Bank, and the superintendence of the
collection of above 3000 casts of the best specimens of mediæval art to
be found in this as well as in foreign countries for the use of the
wood-carvers; preparing plans, estimates, &c., for providing
accommodation for the whole of the public records of the kingdom, and
other miscellaneous services.
On account of the whole of the above-mentioned services I have received
in the course of ten years the sum of 24,735_l._ 3_s._ 2_d._ in part of
the 25,000_l._ originally proposed, or, after deducting my expenses, an
income at the rate of about 1,500_l._ per annum, which income, if based
upon the principle of a fixed remuneration, would in proportion to the
further extent of time occupied in completing the building, suffer a
corresponding decrease; and, when it is considered that in consequence
of my appointment as the architect of the New Palace at Westminster I
have been obliged to give up more than two-thirds of a lucrative
practice, and have to my knowledge been deprived of employment to a very
considerable extent, from a prevalent feeling which has existed that it
was out of my power to attend to any other works; and when also it is
borne in mind that this income constitutes the whole of the emolument
which I derive, either directly or indirectly, from my appointment, it
is scarcely necessary for me to add that such an income does not by any
means recompense me for the labours, responsibilities, and sacrifices
which I have incurred.
The following is an account of the expenditure upon the building,
exclusive of the river embankment wall, up to 31st December, 1848:--
| _£_ _s._ _d._
Amount already advanced on account of works comprised |
in the original estimate of 707,104_l._ | 472,000 0 0
On account of extra works in the embankment of the river |
and in the foundations of the building, the new basement |
story, additional residences and offices, central tower, |
stone carving, and all structural arrangements connected |
with warming, ventilating, &c. &c., which could not have |
been foreseen, and which, consequently, form no part of |
the original design and estimate, amounting to | 210,842 16 2
On account of extra finishings, works of decoration, library |
and other fittings, and for fixtures, furniture, upholstery|
&c., expressly excluded from the original estimate, |
amounting to | 139,415 3 0
On account of miscellaneous items, taking down and |
shoring up old buildings, new roofs and additions to |
speaker’s late residence and other old buildings, temporary|
roof and coverings, clerks of works’ offices, casts |
of specimens for wood-carvers, &c. &c., amounting to | 19,372 18 9
+----------------
Total £ | 841,630 17 11
------------------
On the above amount of expenditure therefore I claim, for the reasons
which I have adduced, the accustomed remuneration of five per cent.:
£ _s._ _d._ £ _s._ _d._
Or 42,081 10 0
Upon which I have received on account 24,735 4 2
--------------
Leaving a balance of £ 17,346 6 10
And for special or extraneous services during a period of
ten years, as above enumerated 5,256 0 0
----------------
Amount now claimed £ 22,602 6 10
==================
Although I have no doubt that I should be able to prove, upon a _quantum
meruit_ valuation, that I am justly entitled to a much higher
remuneration for my services in this case than that of the customary
commission demanded under ordinary circumstances, I propose to adhere to
the long-established and generally received standard of charge adopted
by the profession generally, in the hope that by so doing all
controversy or contention on the subject may be avoided; and when the
amount of the claim which, in consequence, I am now willing to receive
as a recompense in full for my past services, is fairly considered with
reference to the labour, responsibility, and sacrifices incurred in
conducting, under very peculiar and trying circumstances, the largest
and most elaborate architectural work ever, perhaps, undertaken at one
time in this or any other country, to which I have devoted almost
exclusively the best period of my professional life; and when also it is
contrasted with the incomes of other professions, such as those of the
law, medicine, civil engineering, &c., which, it is well known, vary
from 12,000_l._ to 20,000_l._ per annum, and even upwards; and when also
the important fact, to which I have before alluded, is borne in mind,
that every architect appointed to the superintendence of public works in
this country, both before and since the date of my engagement, has been
paid the full amount of the customary commission, I cannot doubt but
that it will be generally admitted, not only that I am fully justified
in the demand which I now make, but that I have not unduly estimated
the value of my services as the architect of such an important national
work as the New Palace at Westminster.
I have, &c.
(Signed) CHARLES BARRY.
(_b._) TREASURY MINUTE OF FEBRUARY, 1854.
From the Treasury to SIR CHARLES BARRY.
Treasury Chambers, 8 February, 1854.
SIR,--I am commanded by the Lords Commissioners of Her Majesty’s
Treasury to acquaint you that my Lords have had under their
consideration a letter addressed by you to the Chancellor of the
Exchequer on the subject of your remuneration as architect for the
New Houses of Parliament.
It appears that, when these works were first undertaken the
estimate for the shell of the building only was 707,104_l._, and
that Lord Bessborough, who was at that time Chief Commissioner of
Woods and Forests, and, as such, charged with the Department of
Works, agreed that the remuneration to the architect should be
25,000_l._, and you state that you accepted that arrangement, but
under protest that it was unprofessional. I have to state that my
Lords have carefully examined into the circumstances which were
likely to have influenced Lord Bessborough in fixing the
remuneration of the architect at that sum, and they find that, for
many years prior, the rate of commission paid by the Board of Works
to the most eminent architects of the day was 3 per cent. They find
that the attached architects of the Board of Works, viz., Sir John
Soane, Sir Robert Smirke, and Mr. John Nash, were, by Treasury
Regulations, paid at the rate of 3 per cent. on the public works
executed under their direction. It is true that those gentlemen had
also salaries of 500_l._ each attached to their offices, but those
salaries were understood to be a remuneration for the professional
advice, which they were expected to afford to the Government, for
which they received no other pay, and not as any part of their
remuneration as architects for the performance of works placed
under their care. On these terms the following works were
performed by those eminent architects:--
New Stamp and Legacy-Duty Office, Somerset House;
Military Depot, Tooley Street;
New Buildings, British Museum;
New Post Office;
Custom House (Restoration);
New Courts of Judicature, Westminster;
Insolvent Debtors’ Court;
Committee Rooms, House of Lords;
Library and Committee Rooms, House of Commons;
Whitehall Chapel (Restoration);
New State Paper Office;
New Royal Mews, Pimlico;
King’s Stand, Ascot;
And my Lords find that the only exception to this rule was as
regards the New Palace at Buckingham Gate.
With regard to that work, Mr. Nash was paid at the regular rate of
3 per cent. up to September, 1826, when it was raised to 5 per
cent., but for what reason my Lords have not been able to
ascertain.
My Lords further find that the allowance made by the Board of Works
to the architects unattached to their establishment has been at the
rate of 3 per cent., and that the following works were executed by
Mr. Burton at that rate:--
New Stable Court, Westminster;
New Stone House, Grenadier Guards, Westminster;
Inclosing Ground, North Side, New Mews, Westminster;
As an exception to that rule, Sir Jeffery Wyattville was paid 5 per
cent. for the restoration of Windsor Castle, under a special
agreement with the Treasury in 1826, by which he engaged not to
charge for his journeys, which in those days were expensive, and
some other extras usually charged by architects.
Looking, then, to the rule which had been established so long in
the office over which Lord Bessborough presided, and to the close
proximity which the sum fixed by his Lordship bears to the
estimate then made for the mere shell of the building, and to the
probable amount of the cost of such fittings as would be placed
under the superintendence of the architect, my Lords can arrive at
no other conclusion than that, in fixing that sum for the entire
work, his Lordship did so with a view to the rate of commission
usually paid by the Department, preferring to take a fixed sum
rather than a commission, as is not unfrequently done, under the
impression that it may avoid an extension of the works, and
consequently of the cost.
My Lords advert to the great increase in the expenditure upon these
works, and to the circumstances under which such increase has from
time to time taken place, to such an extent that the outlay up to
this time is nearly double the sum originally intended. They also
advert to the circumstance, that with regard to some portion of
that expense connected with the internal fittings, assistance and
advice other than that afforded by you has been obtained, and it
appears that in this way Mr. Pugin was employed for some time at a
salary of 200_l._ a-year.
I have to apprise you that, under all the circumstances of the
case, my Lords have arrived at the conclusion, that a fair and even
liberal remuneration to you will be, that you should be paid at the
rate of 3 per cent. upon the cost of the works which have been and
may hereafter be performed under your supervision, including the
fittings, &c., of the building, but subject to a deduction of the
amounts which shall appear to have been paid for the assistance
rendered by Mr. Pugin.
My Lords have therefore requested the Board of Works to furnish
this Board without delay with an exact account of the expenditure
up to the 31st December, 1853, and that an account shall also be
furnished of the several amounts of money which from time to time
have been paid to you on account of the said works; and whatever
balance shall appear to be due to you upon such an account my Lords
will be prepared at once to discharge.
My Lords have also desired that the Board of Works will, in the
present and in every future year, include in their annual
estimates for the New Houses of Parliament a sum equal to 3 per
cent. on the probable outlay of the year, as a remuneration to the
architect, and they have directed that at the close of every year
the value of the work performed may be accurately ascertained, and
the commission of the architect punctually discharged on the
principles herein laid down.
In respect to the cost of measuring the work as it has proceeded,
my Lords advert to the fact, that in the arrangements between the
Board of Works and architects alluded to in the former part of this
communication the understanding was, that that cost should be borne
by the Board of Works. My Lords are, therefore, of opinion that you
should be held free from any charge on that account. They have
therefore requested that the Board of Works will report to this
Board all the facts in connexion with the measurement of the works,
and my Lords will be prepared to reimburse you any sum which you
shall appear to have expended thereon.
I have to add that my Lords have been pleased further to request
that the Board of Works will report fully to this Board as to the
best mode in which the measurement of the work should in future be
made as they proceed, having reference specially to that plan which
will afford the most secure check upon public expenditure.
I am, &c.
(Signed) JAMES WILSON.
(_c._) REPLY OF SIR C. BARRY, MARCH, 1854.