Volltext Seite (XML)
the house came home after business, the family assembled on the ground or principal floor, where the domestic arrangements of the basement were no longer required. The system of party-giving in America differed very much from our own. The guests were satisfied with a very moderate amount of refreshments, which consisted generally of ices and confectionary, andjat most, oysters dressed in various ways. He had been present at large parties, at which nothing but ices were served. Owing to the large scale on which the houses were built, and the extensive domestic arrangements introduced, it was a common custom for families to receive other inmates and boarders, which enabled them toj occupy larger houses than they would otherwise, and rendered spacious rooms necessary. Professor Donaldson, Hon. Sec., For. Corr.—I rise to propose a vote of thanks to our Fellow, Mr. Wheeler, for the very interesting and instructive paper he has favoured us with this evening. There is a great deal of intelligence in this communication; it opens one’s mind, and induces one to think and revolve in the memory the practice both in America and in our own country, and we may learn something thereby. I should be very glad if Mr. Wheeler will favour us with a plan or two of American houses, as a supplement to the very able paper he has drawn up, and I have great pleasure in proposing a vote of thanks to him for it. Professor Kerr, Fellow, said, I have great pleasure in seconding the vote of thanks. I have listened to this paper, and to Mr. Wheeler’s sub sequent explanations, with great interest, for two reasons:—-first, because many years ago I spent a short time myself in New York, with the intention of settling there; and, secondly, because the subject of the paper is one to which I have specially devoted myself, namely, domestic architecture. It seems to me we may explain a good deal of what Mr. Wheeler has pointed out as differences between the American system and our own, upon principles comparatively simple. The city house which he has described in such glowing colours is more than anything else an imitation of the Parisian house—certainly an American imitation of it, hut more French than, for instance, English ; and when it is said that New York mansions are superior to London mansions (of the average, of course), it is merely because there are certain conditions attaching to London, which regulate the plan of London houses of the highest class to their prejudice. It is, however, when we go into the country in America, that we find ourselves in a state of things, as compared with what prevails in the country here, which is more interesting in respect of those diffe rences of plan which Mr. Wheeler has hinted at. Let me for a moment classify English houses. Passing by the cottages of the lower classes, and also those houses which are places of business, we have two distinct kinds of country dwellings, the origin of which, in both cases, is his torical. The one class is the JFarm House, the other class is the Gentlemen's House. And I may at once say that as our farm house is the original type of the country house generally in America, so it is the same farm house which is that of the gentlemen’s house in America. I am told by an excellent authority on such a point, who has only lately passed over a good deal of ground in America, that I am quite right in saying that a gentleman’s house, in the English sense of the phrase, is scarcely to be met with in the length and breadth of the land. Now the English farm house is based in all its arrangements upon the idea of the operations of agriculture being carried on from the house as head quarters ; and one consequence is, for example, that a peculiar necessity arises for the close contiguity even in the best houses of the dining room and the kitchen, because the servants of the house have other duties to perform than mere domestic service. But the gentleman’s house of England is a thing of an entirely different principle. It dates back from a remote period ; we are able to follow it in its details down to the present day without interruption (except that which occurred in the last century by the partial introduction of the Palladian plan); and the requirements of the family and the servants respectively are almost identical now with those belonging to the fifteenth or sixteenth century. The consequence is, that a certain type of plan has grown up and become established, so that it cannot be deviated from with propriety. Now this depends upon elements which never existed in America, or rather, I ought to say, certainly never in the Northern States, to any considerable extent, although possibly in a modified form—and in fact a very different form—in the South before the abolition of slavery. The point I especially refer to is the sepa ration of the two classes of persons—the family and the servants, who are the occupants of the house. It is a radical fact with us that the family are a superior class of persons—the servants an inferior class (and yet in no way like the bondsmen of the old South); and that each class shall be provided for on its own ground in its own way ; the family to be waited upon, and the servants to wait upon them; and servants’ accommodation should have no connection with the family accommodation, and yet be so placed as to facilitate to the utmost the service of the family. It therefore stands to reason that such condi tions should cause corresponding peculiarities in the plan of the country houses, and that amongst other things there should be produced that one peculiarity which places the dining room, really a salle d manger, in close contiguity with the kitchen or cookery. Again, it is doubtful whether in respect to their own locations and surroundings there are in America any country houses, in the sense of landlord’s houses standing in the midst of large freehold estates let to tenants. The nearest approximation is the farm house on a large farm, as the model “ country house ” of even a wealthy man; the only other “ gentleman’s house ” being the villa, a few miles from some metro politan centre of business, and accommodating some one engaged in daily trade. Another thing which affects the plan of private houses in towns it the almost universal system of living in hotels and boarding houses, even on the part of the more wealthy classes. It is even the practice among the common middle classes for visitors to a family to pay so much a week for their board. This illustrates what the peculiarities of American living are, which of course give rise to such peculiarities in the arrangement of houses as Mr. Wheeler has adverted to. The question of American architectural style is one of interest to us all, though it does not seem desirable to go into it to-night; yet it might be very profitably speculated upon, and especially now that technical education is becoming with us a political question. Our American friends seem to have edu cated themselves in respect to style upon mainly two exemplars,—the one the English practice, and the other the French. Our friend, Mr. Ware, of Boston, who so recently favoured us here with a paper on a kindred subject to this, told me, on his return from travelling over a considerable part of Europe, that he was more struck than ever with the decided preference which Americans must necessarily feel for the English models, and that it was plain there was comparatively little to be had, even in Paris itself, suited to American architecture. To come to details, it might be interesting to know why the Gothic style, so fashionable here, does not seem to be so much affected in America. Reasons may be assigned, not prejudicial to the style itself, but mainly referring to the peculiar circumstances of the inhabitants rather than to any peculiar preferences they have formed. One building, however, which Mr. Wheeler particularly referred to—the School of Art in New York—is of very good Gothic ; and the decoration which he spoke of as formed upon natural and local bases is but the foliage of the carv ings. Whether domestic architecture is at all likely to bring forth a new style of design in America, as Mr. Wheeler suggests, is a question which I think may be readily answered. I, for one, believe it is not likely to do so. I think if timber architecture—that is, the artistic use of timber in construction—were to become an American practice (which I do not suppose likely), then there might arise something like a national style of domestic architecture in America; otherwise I do not see any element in the ordinary construction of American houses which would lead American architects to deviate much from those models to which we in England are accustomed. They might not, perhaps, be expected to adopt our Elizabethan style,—to my mind the most charming of English modes,—but the various forms of our rural Italian might be suitable to all possible requirements. The state of criticism in America is one which affects the question of architectural style materially. Public criticism in England is bad enough; public criticism in America is worse. I have always had the idea, for example, that Parisians do not criticise their public works of art on the same vulgar principles that Londoners adopt. If our National Gallery were in Paris I think it might have been criti cised severely enough, but more rationally and deliberately, and cer tainly in more artistic phraseology than our newspaper hacks have been in the habit of applying to it. But American criticism is even more vulgar and preposterous than ours. I remember the first Gothic spire which was finished in New York,—that of Grace Church, at the top of the then line of Broadway;—and I have never forgotten the opinion expressed about it by the “New York Herald,” still one of the most influential, at all events amongst the journals in that city. The spire was crocketted; and the verdict passed upon it was, that it was “ like an alligator standing on his head !” English architectural criti cism has, perhaps, never attained this extremity of ignorant absurdity; but it always seems to me to be matter for grave regret when it runs, as it so often does, so decidedly in that direction. Mr. J. W. Papworth, Fellow, said as one important feature of the American houses was the mode of warming them, he should be glad to hear a little more as to the mode in which it was done. Mr. Wheeler replied there were many different systems, the most general being that of hot air from the furnace in the cellar, conducted by pipes through the whole house, and into every room. The pipes were generally tubes of tin varying from eight to fourteen inches diameter. It was a common arrangement in New York houses for the salons to be divided by scagliola columns, which were hollow, and carried the hot air to the rooms above as well as warming the apart ment itself. The principal objection to this system was the very dry ing effects it had upon the whole material of the house, especially the woodwork, which rendered it very inflammable, and in case of fire the danger was much increased. The amount of heat was regulated by a valve in each room, which could be opened or closed at pleasure ; and it was remarked that this system of warming formed also an excellent means of ventilation. Keeping the valves open introduced a delicious current of air into all the rooms in the summer time ; and in the case