suited to arouse the admiring wonder and to excite the envy of ambitious opulence. Compared with houses built threequarters of a century before, in Russell Square and other wealthy neighbourhoods, these mansions show a great decline of dignity and worthiness. They are elaborate man-traps; the poor sufferers who inhabit them are there to make a show; and are, it seems, the least important incident about the place. The houses have no amplitude of width; and the main stairs, confined and narrow, are but step-ladders in proportion to the costliness and ornament expended on the building. Those who live in London, and particularly those who always have lived there, are apt to take the circumstances and condition of the place as normal, not exceptional; and they regard the town as an extremely large but very natural growth for housing an increasing aggregate of men of trade. Considering it only as a place for shops and lodgings, and observing only their own little corner of the seeming endless town, they never notice what it is in London that has been for generations stifling art, and hindering the dignified and ample housing of all classes of the people. Popular, indigenous, and living art of every kind is founded on, or correlated with, vernacular domestic architecture; and house building, in a true artistic sense, is never possible on leasehold tenure. On consideration, the idea of such a possibility is felt at once to be absurd; and as a fact, and owing to our individual lackland state, the art does not exist among us. Art that would be truly national, pervading, cherished, and accepted by all classes of society, must be securely founded on some universal popular requirement; and the chief, most dignified requirement of families is certainly a house. If houses are again habitually provided by their occupying owners, then, in the building of them under the combined direction of the master workmen, there will be a new development of art that will be constant and progressive. Public architectural knowledge will again be universal; public criticism will be prompt, discerning, and intelligent; and a new, systematic architectural language, flexible and copious for every need, will be developed, and adapted to the growing wants and higher culture of all classes of society. It has recently been said that the artistic workman's architectural mastery rests on the scantiest of evidence.' The statement is an evidence of very scanty information. As has been fully shown in this Review,* the evidence is overwhelm *Quarterly Review,' April 1872 and October 1874. ing. No one ventures to dispute it, or has ever manifested any theory or evidence against a chain of proof so perfect and unbroken. It is further quite ingenuously admitted that the bright days of architecture were just those in which there was no thought of severing the artist and the artificer'; which is precisely our contention. Such bright days, however, are not ours, because the severance between the artisan and art is now complete; and we have but a Royal Institute of British Architects, the representative and organ of an imitative 'art,' of an absurd 'profession,' and of sordid 'business;' utterly incapable of handicraft and art. But what must be the remedy? Our thirteen Essayists have taken the initiative and have raised their protest. Will the public read and mark their sensible appeal, and bring their minds to primitive simplicity of method in their architectural work? These Essays are, no doubt, to those familiar with the literature of the profession, a surprise. The contrast to the ordinary style of architectural discussion is so marked as to compel consideration. It is as if the several protesting architects, developing in mind, had dropped professionalism; and, being thus relieved of an unfortunate association, had gained a cheerful outlook which has influenced their literary utterance. It is not this, however, but the higher aspiration of the Essays that is their great charm; they arouse a public expectation that after four centuries of decadence, to absolute negation, there may be a prompt revival of the building art. There is a tone of hopefulness in all the Essays that makes pleasant reading; in peculiar distinction from such literary work of the profession as too commonly appears before the public. Nothing can exceed the dreariness of an Address by a President of the Royal Institute of British Architects; yet these displays are thankfully accepted, and-O sancta simplicitas!—applauded at the Royal Institute. The public may in time endeavour to promote the architectural reform that the Essayists have so happily begun. In perfect social and professional unacquaintance with the individual members of the Institute, we can of course but hope that most of those who still remain are in their inclination fairly represented by those members who have recently retired. If this is so, we may anticipate a large continuous secession from a system, and a Royal Institute that, once promoted with the best intentions, though erroneous in their scheme, are fraught with injury to individual architects, as well as to the practice of a noble handicraft. Young pseudo-architects, apparently, must always waste their time and energy in much fantastic drawing of designs for monumental monumental works, cathedrals, public galleries, tombs, and baths, town-halls, and senate-houses, till their minds appear almost incapable of ordinary work; and so the years roll by, while they are waiting for employment. Were they to give up all this dreaming, and become proficient with the tools, they might immediately make themselves true artists in the various works of architecture; and, instead of spending their best years of life in waiting on a sham and pitiful profession, they would find a new and permament delight in building. Their whole course and sentiment of life would be immediately changed; and they would have the solace of abundant happiness in works of architectural creation. Furthermore, our young men of acute and lively genius, seeking to be real architects, should bear in mind the declaration of Sir Gilbert Scott respecting those who are their present seniors at the Royal Institute of British Architects. They should determine that the ill proportion of unworthiness shall be transposed; and that they, five-sixths of them at least, will make themselves efficient artisans. They then might seek the aid of our Essayists as their leaders and advisers; and thus founding a new school of practical artistic building work, without aspiring to senate-houses and cathedrals, they might begin by personally making modest cottages, and houses for the people. If these humble works are thoroughly well done, with such improvement as intelligence should always make on what has gone before, the men who thus have sought the lowest place in building art will quickly be invoked to go up higher; and the architectural artistic life of England will begin anew. ART. ART. III.1. St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians. By Joseph Barber Lightfoot, D.D., D.C.L., LL.D. London, 1865. Tenth edition, 1892. 2. St. Paul's Epistle to the Philippians. By the Same. London, 1868. Tenth edition, 1891. 3. St. Clement of Rome. By the Same. London, 1869. Second edition, 1890. 4. Fresh Revision of the Same. London, 1871. 5. St. Paul's Epistle to the 1875. English New Testament. By the Third edition, 1890. 6. St. Clement of Rome. Appendix. By the Same. 1877. 7. Primary Charge. By the Same. London, 1882. 8. Charge. By the Same. London, 1886. London, London, 9. Apostolic Fathers. Part II. (vols. i.-iii.). By the Same. London, 1885-89. 10. Essays on Supernatural Religion. By the Same. London, 1889. 11. Apostolic Fathers. Part I. (vols. i. and ii.) By the Same. London, 1890. 12. Leaders in the Northern Church. By the Same. London, 1890. Second edition, 1892. 13. Ordination Addresses. By the Same. London, 1890. Second edition, 1891. 14. Cambridge Sermons. By the Same. London, 1890. 15. Apostolic Fathers Abridged. By the Same. London, 1891. 16. Sermons preached in St. Paul's. By the Same. London, 1891. 17. Special Sermons. By the Same. 18. Dissertations on the Apostolic Age. 1892. JOSEPHI BARBER London, 1891. By the Same. London, LIGHTFOOT, S.T.P. EPISCOPI + IN MEMORIAM DUNELMENSIS, NATUS A.D. MDCCCXXVIII., OBIIT A.D. MDCCCLXXXIX. QUALIS FUERIT ANTIQUITATIS INVESTIGATOR EVANGELII INTERPRES ECCLESIE RECTOR TESTANTUR OPERA UT ÆQUALIBUS ITA POSTERIS PROFUTURA + AD MAJORE DEI GLORIA. AM. PON. CVR. +' SUG UCH is the inscription encircling the monument which was disclosed to view in the Cathedral Church of Durham on Thursday, the twentieth day of October last, when, in the presence of the Lord Chancellor of England, the Archbishop of the Province, the Bishop of the Diocese, the Speaker of the House of Commons, and a large congregation of dignitaries and commoners commoners of all classes, lay as well as clerical, the Lord Lieutenant of the county unveiled the effigy of the late Bishop Lightfoot. The monument itself is said to be in every way worthy of the place near the sanctuary which has been assigned to it, of the great prelate whom it commemorates, and of the great artists who devoted to it of their best. Sir Edgar Boehm is known to have worked at the model in the last hours of his life, and Mr. Gilbert has generously completed the unfinished task with a result which reflects honour alike on his master and on himself. It is not, however, with the monument but with the thoughts which the inscription suggests that we propose to deal. It is said to have come from the hand of Bishop Lightfoot's great friend and successor, and may be intended to indicate that, as while he was with us so now that he has been taken from us, the retiring man is to be known by his works. We have seen no announcement of any forthcoming biography, but we cannot help thinking that to a large circle of readers some presentation of the main facts of this great life would be welcome; and in the absence of a fuller record we believe that such a brief sketch as the limits of an article can afford will not be unwelcome. We shall find the chief lines of this sketch in the Bishop's works; but let us look for a moment at the boy who was father to the man. Joseph Barber Lightfoot was the younger son of Mr. John Jackson Lightfoot, a Liverpool accountant, and was born at his father's house, 84, Duke Street, in that city, on April 13th, 1828. His mother was a sister of Mr. John Vincent Barber, a Birmingham artist of considerable repute, who had married the only daughter of Zaccheus Walker, eldest son of the 'wonderful' Walker of Seathwaite, who is immortalised in Wordsworth's 'Excursion.' Of the three other children an elder brother became a good Cambridge scholar, and was for many years Master of the Grammar School at Basingstoke. The younger brother was indebted to him for many acts of kindness which removed difficulties from his early course. One sister was married to the Rev. William Harrison of Pontesbury, and left an only son, who is a curate in the Diocese of Durham. The other survives, and is the only Lightfoot of this family now remaining. It has been not unnatural to seek to establish a connexion between this family and that of Dr. John Lightfoot, the seventeenth-century theologian and Hebraist, but there is, we believe, no true ground for doing so. The young Joe,' as he was familiarly called at home and at school, was a delicate lad, and was privately educated until he was about thirteen. His first year of school life was under the care |