Real Estate Record





AND     BUILDERS'    GUIDE.





Vol. XVII.





NEW YORK, SATURDAY, MAY 13, 1876.





No. 426.





Published Weekly by

THE REAL ESTATE RECORD ASSOCIATION

0. W. SWHET...............Pkesident and Teeasceeb

PRBSTON I. SWEET...........Seceetaby.

L. ISRAELS.........................Business MA.*fAGEB

TERMS.
OKB TEAR, in atlvance....^10 00.
Communications should be addressed to

O.   SV.   STVIQEJT,

Nos. 345 AND 347 Bboadwat.





A CHAPTER   ON   ARCHITECTURE.

Mncli bas been written respecting the want of
a distinctive school of architecture in this coun¬
try. It is complaiuecl that Americans are servile
copyists, that we reproduce here architecture,
both in oui- churches, our public edifices, and
our private dwellings, which is adapted for other
climates and for different environments. Many
eminent architects thus are given as authority
for criticising our churches and public build¬
ings particularly as being anachronisms, and
not being adapted to the religious idea to be ex¬
pressed or the public use which the building is
intended to subserve.

There is undoubtedly force in much of the de¬
tached criticism concerning architecture in this
country, but it must be bomo in mind that we
are a composite nation; we represent no one race
and no one religion. Our country, also, has every
variety of climate. "We have arctic cold, tropi¬
cal heat; we have river bottoms, lake exposure,
ocean fronts, as well as mountain sites, all of
which demand a varying style of architecture. It
was the pecaharity of architectural stnictures in
the past that they represented the religion eras of
distinctive faiths, or in their domestic architec¬
ture embodied certain marked climatic pecul¬
iarities. Grecian architecture, as evinced by their
temples, was based upon the sacrificial charac
ter of their religious ceremonials. A polytheis¬
tic religion, the offering up of sacrifices, was fitly
symbolized in the Corinthian, Doric, and Ionic
orders of architecture, and particularly in theii-
temples. These were not intended for singing or
speaking, but for spectacular ceremonials. Again,
the Gothic style of the Middle Ages represented
the Catholic ideal, the best specimen of which—
the famous Cathedral of Cologne—shows that
there was this advance upon the ancient archi¬
tecture that it was intended for the performance
of the mass, in which spectacle was united with
singing and choral music. Hence the fretted
vaults and cells where music "lingered on as
loth to die." The temples of Egypt, Ninevah
and Babylon were symbolic of the religious idea
to be expressed, and each had its appropriate
characteristic. The faith of Islam is also typi¬
fied by the domed and minareted mosque.
But, properly speaking, our modern architecture
typifies no special religious creed; or rather it
represents, wiih the religious ideas of the past,
many  modern improvements  and  variations.





We have in this age numerous and diverse
creeds, consequently our places of religious ob¬
servances extend from the ordinary meeting¬
house through all the ranges of the architectural
gamut. Thus while some are adapted merely
for speaking, others are arranged so as to be
conformable to the requirements of the choir,
the organ, the mass and the ritualistic spectacle.

In like manner, a great deal of ignorant criti¬
cism has been wasted on our public buildings,
and accordingly the Post-of&ce of thi^ city, on
account of its composite character, has received
its share of opprobrium. Very eminent archi¬
tectural authorities, among whom, we believe,
maybe mentioned Leopold Eidlitz, have de¬
clared that it was a monstrosity, inasmuch as it
combined a great number of diverse ideas, rang¬
ing all the way from Grecian, Eoman and Me-
diseval ideas of architecture down to the present
day, and including the inevitable Mansard roof.
Nevertheless, to the ordinary mind the new
Post-ofiice seems to be a inagnificent building,
well proportioned, appropriate, and an ornament
to the city, however it may violate such canons
of the art as are laid down by Mr. Eidlitz and
other critics. In truth, there is a theory of de¬
velopment in architecture as well as in nature.
The human embryo and foetus pass through
all the inferior forms before reaching that of
man. As the fish, reptile, and mammal precede
the type of man, and as man embodies all pre¬
ceding forms of life, so in architecture does the
modem public edifice represent all previous
ideas in architecture; and hence what may
seem incongruous to the mere critic, who has
not grasped this idea of development, and who
judges each type of architecture by its own
narrow rules, may be its chief recommendation.

The Coria thian or Doric temple would be mani •
festly out of place as a modern Custom-house
or Post-office. Given the idea of the business
to be performed, it is competent for the archi¬
tect to draw from ail preceding styles of archi¬
tecture, and so long as there is a harmony of
ideas in the work he deserves commendation,
instead of adverse criticism. Modern archi¬
tecture is a good deal like the modern orches¬
tra as compared with the viol or flute of the an¬
cients. It includes a great many different in¬
struments, instead of a single dulcimer, on which
to express harmonic thoughts. So in our edi¬
fices, it is quite proper for us to have the Swiss
chalet, ihe Tuscan villa, the Boman country
house, the Elizabethan cottage, the only re¬
straint being that each style ot house should be
fitted to its environments. Thus it is evident
that such a style of villa as may be fit for a sea¬
shore is not best midway up a mountain,
and that what would add beauty to a prairie
would be manifestly out of place on the
shores of a river or a lake. It is the in-
appropriateness of the locations very often
wMch makes our architecture incongruous; but





we insist that every variety of dwelling knovm
to the Old "World or the older civilizations could
be utiUzed in thia country, where we have such
an immense variety of natural scenery. Our
modem Protestant faiths have developed the
meeting-house, the best examples of which are
seen in churches like those of Mr. Beecher and
Mr. Hepworth, which are intended simply for
the convenience of the audience in seeing and
hearing the ministers, and not at all for spectac¬
ular displays. The Corinthian, Doric, or Ionic
temple would be out of place as a Protestant
meeting-house, as they were not intended for
sound, but for sight—for the offering up of
sacrifices, and not for the ministrations of an
eloquent preacher. It is in this regard that
we show our incongruous and unformed tastes—,
a mere imitation of edifices constructed for a dif¬
ferent purpose, and embodying a distinctive
religious idea. "We may recur again to this sub¬
ject; but it is evident that we in this country de¬
mand an eclectic school of architecture, and that
any critic who objects to the composite charac¬
ter of our public edifices, or the great variety o
ideas which the "best modern work justifies, is
behindhand in the higher principles of his axt.
Mr. Eidlitz himself, in his Synagogue on Fifth
avenue and the new Dry Dock Bank, wisely de¬
parts from the rules he is in the habit of laying
down touching the work of other architects. His
best work is where his theory is not associated
with his practice.

A HINT TO BANK OFFICERS.





Why cannot we have a bank edifice intended
for the comfort and convenience of the people
who patronize such institutions? Gentlemen
who have occasion to deposit money, or to
transact business with the cashiers or tellers of
banks, are compelled to do so at the sacrifice of
their self-respect. Every person who deals with
a bank is treated as a possible thief. If ho
wishes to deposit money, he must do it through
a hole where he bands it to the teller, who is
guarded by glass and wire, so as to offer no
chance for possible courtesy. Likewise, in
handing his check for money, he is treated as if
he were a possible thief; hence, we think, has
grown up the reprehensible practice of allowing
porters and office-boys to deposit moneys and
receive large sums intended for the firms to
which they belong. No man with any self-
respect wishes either to deposit money him-
seK or receive it from a bank. There
is a sense of humiliation in being treated
as if you were a rogue in all your deal¬
ings with the bankers you patronize. It
is of course desirable and inevitable that
banks should deal with persona whom they
do not know with a great deal of reserve and
positive suspicion; but surely the gentleinen
who are in the habit of leaving large sums of
money on deposit deserve somewhat better treat-