completely insulated from all others. Perhaps it would be better, instead of striving to accommodate circumstances to any rule of the kind, to consider how the most can be made of them, and what mode of treatment is the most likely to produce the happiest composition.

We are far better satisfied with the author's ideas on the subject of intercolumniation, which has hitherto been regulated by the diameter of the column, without regard to its height; whereas he shows that it should be governed by the latter rather than the former. Whatever be the height of the column, that will give the distance from the axis to that of some other in the same range, whether it be the third or the fourth-according as it is intended to have them closer or wider apart; and this, of course, determines the spaces between these and the intermediate column or columns, and all the succeeding ones. By this means, an harmonious succession of squares formed by each column and the third or fourth from it is obtained; neither, as he further observes, is it necessary that such squares should invariably be restricted to the measurement from the axis, and admit of no other change than that arising from the number of intermediate columns, because the fourth column may either be included in or excluded from such figure, whose boundary will then be defined by one of its sides. He also shows how, in the Doric, the measure may be regulated, not by the height of the column alone, but by that to the top of the triglyph in the frieze, as that gives an extent of vertical line.

We are not among those who attach much importance to the precise origin of different styles of architecture: unless founded upon direct historical testimony, questions of that kind are apt to lead into chimerical and bewildering hypotheses-mere ingenious speculations, that afford scope for fanciful conjecture, but are almost utterly barren of any advantage to the art itself. There has been too much of this vague inquiry in regard to Gothic architecture, relative to the origin of which various contradictory and nearly equally plausible theories have been started, that leave the point at issue as undecided as it was at first. Controversies of this kind may in some degree be useful, because they excite public interest in behalf of the subject; yet, on the other hand, they are apt to engross attention too exclusively, and to withdraw it from more profitable and important considerations. It is, however, a matter of something more than mere historical curiosity, to settle whether we ought to attribute the formation of the Greek style to an original stone or timber construction, because much turns upon that point, inasmuch as we shall accordingly be able to judge how far Greek taste refined upon the earlier elements of form. Many, if not most, still adhere to the

theory of Vitruvius, and trace back the rich marble temple to the primitive wooden hut; yet both analogy and internal evidence oppose such an idea, for construction in timber would undoubtedly have led to a far more fanciful and lighter style. We cannot do better than let our readers see what Wolff himself says upon this subject.

"The entire character of Grecian, as well as of Egyptian and of our own German style, is essentially connected with construction in stone, which alone is capable of accounting for the architectonic principles that it exhibits. These, together with the forms deduced from them, the disposition of the masses as regards bearing and support, the collocation of the different members, their profiles, and other circumstances, become quite unintelligible and inexplicable, as soon as we substitute mere beams of wood and light timber materials,—which although easily supported, do not keep compacted together by their own weight, for massive blocks and ponderous architraves of stone, which require corresponding massiveness in the parts that sustain them, and by their pressure upon them give great firmness to these latter. Even where, either owing to scarcity of stone, or for some other reason, wood has been employed, it is evident that the forms are derived from construction in stone, and as closely copied as possible from such prototype; for the nature of wood itself affords no motives whatever for the forms adopted. The contrary opinion, maintained by Hirt in his work on the Architecture of the Ancients, where he endeavours to account for every thing on the supposition of its having originated in timber construction, has misled that able writer, and by this one leading error, has considerably lessened the value of his otherwise important inquiries. The proofs that stone construction manifests itself in Grecian architecture, both in its very rudiments and in the minutest parts, are so numerous and so obvious that they cannot be overlooked by any one who considers them impartially and without prejudice. We shall have opportunities of noticing them more particularly as we proceed, and shall therefore now pass to some general remarks on the columns. "We are certainly warranted in supposing that the form of these supports was originally square, especially in cavern structures and the interior of buildings, and the angles began in time to be splayed off, until it gradually became polygonal and afterwards cylindrical; which successive mutations might easily be corroborated historically by Egyptian examples. We shall, however, content ourselves with taking up our observations at the period when the Greek column had assumed this latter shape, after which it was left for art to refine it into beauty, so as to contribute to its æsthetic effect in architecture.

"The very nature and purpose of such supports prevented their having any perfect architectonic form. They possess no entireness of character in themselves; but rather, by their loftier proportions and shape, seem to rear themselves up, not like so many inert masses, but as if endued with internal organic power. It remained, therefore, for art to develop this idea, to remove them from the class of unorganic

shapes, to round off all their angles, and, moulding them by degrees to some similarity of vegetable character, to render them more attractive to the eye. For effecting this purpose, that refined and reflecting taste, which taught the Greeks to observe the due limits of every art, contented itself with merely indicating the principle of organization, still maintaining the expression of mathematical form."

As further proof that Grecian architecture is not derived from an original construction with wood, the author observes that a like regard to æsthetic beauty of form is apparent in the cylindrical pillars of the Egyptians, whose country affords no timber materials for buildings of any magnitude. Having thus, as he conceives, ascertained the principle of form, his next object is that of proportion; which he says cannot possibly be derived from the vegetable world, since that hardly affords any law for fixity of proportion. This, therefore, he is inclined to attribute to a free imitation of the general proportions of the human figure; but certainly not that mechanical, fancifully exact, and immediate imitation to which Vitruvius would refer us. Wolff sees in this kind of imitation no more than a motive-an indirect aim, just sufficient to catch and preserve similarity as far as regards general impression. Conformably with this aim, he considers that deviations from a fixed standard of proportion are not only allowable but advisable, since such shades of distinction are favourable to that particular individuality of character, which may best accord with other circumstances in the building.

We cannot pretend to follow our author throughout his reasonings, or even to enumerate the leading particulars which he minutely examines; we shall, therefore, before dismissing the book, briefly refer to one or two detached points that, as far as they are concerned, may suffice to indicate how fully the rationale of every circumstance is here explained. In his remarks upon the capital and its abacus, he shows that, independently of its supposed office, the propriety of beauty and aesthetic consistency demand this member as a completion, of integration, of the whole column. Not only is the upper extremity thus made to accord with the lower, and, as before observed, the verticality lost by the diminution of the shaft upwards restored to the eye; but it is indispensable, as preparatory to the architrave resting upon it. Since the architrave stretches only in one direction, a circle inscribed upon it by the capital terminating in that form, would ill agree with the merely horizontal expansion of the soffit. By inscribing the circle within a square, the imperfection is overcome both forms have then one common centre, while the overhanging angles of square produce the effect of an harmonious contrast between the two. Another inconvenience is moreover

avoided, and another beauty obtained; because the intervention of this square plate allows the soffit to be made somewhat narrower than the diameter of the upper part of the capital, and while the architrave is thereby rendered less heavy in appearance, the abacus displays itself to greater advantage, and produces greater perspective variety. The value of fluting, as contributing to the play of light and shadow on the shaft of the column, as well as to finish of surface, has been pointed out by others; yet we do not recollect that any preceding writer has assigned to it that particular æsthetic quality which Wolff has explained and illustrated by analogical examples. By their all tending to and indicating one common centre in the axis of the column, he says that the channels and their arrises, or fillets, render the circularity of the shaft more apparent, less vague, and less indefinitely expressed to the eye, than is the case when the surface of a cylindrical or conical body is left plain. Perhaps this is rather a super-refinement of reasoning, because, though only half of such an object is visible, the eye instantly recognizes its true form, even when it is little assisted by direct light and shade. Some modern architects have taken great and very useless pains to determine the proper pitch for pediments, according to their width, without much regard to other proportion; whereas Wolff is of opinion, and herein we perfectly agree with him, that the height of the pediment admits of little variation under any circumstances, since it must be regulated by that of the entablature beneath it. It never ought much to exceed this; consequently, the wider a building or portico is in proportion to the height of the order, the lower must the pitch of the pediment be made, in order to preserve harmony and consistency between the height of the building and that of its roof.

Here we must take our leave of Professor Wolff for the present, hoping that it will not be very long before the appearance of the continuation which he promises will enable us to return to his interesting and able inquiries. Even as mere speculative opinions, his observations are highly deserving attention; but we are willing to anticipate much practical good from their dissemination, more discriminating and enlightened views of the art on the part of criticism, and emancipation from that servile spirit of routine, which, while it damps all inventive energy in the architect, and in fact degrades him to a mere mechanic, is, as daily evidence too clearly proves, no protection against the extravagancies of perverted taste and caprice. Nor is caprice rendered at all less offensive by its being associated with hopeless dulness.

ART. VIII.-1. Des Pauvres, des Mendians et de leurs droits, par Loubens, Avocat. Paris, 1829. 8vo.

2. Economie Politique Chrétienne, ou Recherches sur la Nature et les Causes du Puupérisme &c., par M. le Vte. Alban de Villeneuve-Bargemont, ancien Préfet du Nord, &c. Paris, 1834. 3 vols. 8vo.

3. Etat numérique de la Population indigente de Paris, 1832. Sheets, 1834.

4. Procès-Verbal de l'Assemblée générale du Bureau de Bienfaisance du 5me Arrondissement. Paris, 1834.

5. Rapport de M. le Comte Rambuteau, Préfet de la Seine, au Conseil Municipal. Paris, 1834.

"Si quantum pauperum est, venire huc, et liberis suis petere pecunias cœperint, singuli nunquam exsatiabuntur; respublica deficiet; ** et securi omnes aliena subsidia expectabunt, sibi ignavi, nobis graves." Such was the reply of Tiberius to some importunate applicants for places in the Roman Black-book. Although spoken of the high-born, it may likewise be addressed to such as seek to be entered in the Black-book of the parish. And unless the new Commissioners find means to stop the mischief as successfully as the old emperor, we may hereafter find reason to exclaim-deficiet respublica.

But, though most sorely afflicted, our own country is not the only one suffering under the disease. In Great Britain the paupers compose one-sixth of the inhabitants. In Holland and Belgium they are one-seventh, and in Switzerland one-tenth; whilst in France and the German confederacy they are onetwentieth; in Austria, Italy, Sweden, Denmark, and Portugal, onetwenty-fifth, and in Prussia and Spain only one-thirtieth.

Of the causes of this great discrepancy it is not our present business to speak. Let us content ourselves with laying before our readers some of the information concerning pauperism in France-the most important of the continental nations-which is afforded by the productions prefixed to this paper, and resulting, in part, from our own investigation.

The calculations of M. de Villeneuve are based upon inquiries made immediately before the events of 1830. Affairs of more pressing importance have engaged the attention of the Government, since that period, to the exclusion of inquiries of this kind; so that no late information can be obtained. But it may be safely assumed that the number of paupers has not diminished. It is more likely to have increased. M. de Villeneuve seems to have conducted his researches with diligence and care, and his