EXC

401

EXC

In the north and south fronts,

Of 4.L

on o e att ic at the east end. _ - _,

t|, e keystones of the centre arches, the arms are those oflt; y. the Mercer’s Company, and Sir Thomas Gresham ,j , Estimate.

dijj es ^ iruate the cost of this edifice, as thus described, inclu-o sculpture, at the sum of £143,800.

| , Income.

fr 0ni ave estimated with great care the income to be derivedl>os e( j . var ious shops, offices, and public establishments, pro-(linj the several floors of the building, by comparinglemons and other circumstances, with the previousti et 8 s ’ a nd by the actual value derived from my own expe-p > and I am of opinion that the total net annual value,° n lease, would amount to the sum of £8,718 perIn addition to this, if the space allotted to Lloyd’s4s S(1 erc >al room on the north side, and that to the LondonSet ^ aac e on the south side, were arranged as offices, eachav,n g two rooms, one over the other, as suggested in aniiw, ^ art °I this statement, though the estimate would bej, . Se< * £3,000, I have no doubt this annual income might

lfip

'fleta,ln um,

’iCi

ta 'sed

to the extent of £800 per annum, making a total

°I £9,500 per annum.

drawings themselves, I have carefully laboured to

Petifi. ° a t the instructions under which I undertook this com-

■0\V

The views are strictly confined to tlie points of: itnX ? rescr ibed: in the colouring of the views themselves,the drawings of the adjoining buildings, I havel he a ec * to be accurate, and to give as nearly as I could,hot i Ua ‘ effect of this edifice, if it were constructed. I can-

i(Jt l CL

av e bu . tfa el

Wi, keen

that a more elaborate style of architecture would0|) ldT“ P r °I uct ' ve more picturesque effects, and itv etit Ur ~* ay e been easy to have produced them ; but I havetkanj ** to c °me to the conclusion, that nothing but plainSa,"* an< f elegant simplicity is consistent, either with the(v the disposal of the Committee, the purposes and usesQify A kuilding, or its situation in the very heart of the, ■'iV (; ) | k° n< ion.

J| Jil(Ji n ave given at length Mr. Tite’s own description of thea *ttinn ^’, as affording the most perfect and complete expla-every particular connected with it, and also asthe

’°tt f

every particular connected with it,

X ls 8 - the many requirements he had to meet, and theq^erests he had to provide for. It is due to him tol | c C0J1 he has certainly succeeded in satisfying all parties, in^ile , Ven 'ence of his arrangements for individual benefit,5< kfice ^ k !la added to the public buildings of London an' v °tl ( j. 1,1 every respect worthy the first community in the■ ^e a, ,V n one part of the design much discussion took

, at the i

time, viz., whether the area of the new Exchanger should not be an open court, as in the old building.

iiui- ub hu upt;n court, as m me oiu uunuiiig.1 e8 haty 1 Stl ' Uc ^ on3 * ssue( f to the competing architects by theih^tQed 9° mm 'ttee, this was insisted on, and, as we arei c ha ’ 111 compliance with the general opinion of the^ 8 an d bankers of London . With submission, how-^ tl le strongly inclined to believe that the merchants’th y„, Gresham Committee might have left this matter,

C""*-

to the discretion of the architects offering- o-i j "’'th whom it would have remained to demonstrate

vantage

St.

> her '"■ a S e or _

It i 0 _ P eri or covered.

defects of either mode of construction,-vered.

^et er °f remark that the Bourse at Paris , and at° st all Ur "’ tlle Exchanges of Dublin and Glasgow , and> , Modern structures erected for a similar purpose,

sku r g ) t | le Exchanges of Dublin and Glasgow , and

^hoj 6 ' 6ve ’ ro °f e( i in > one advantage of which is, that°Urahi°^ *k e ar ea is available, let the weather be asMi * ° a n 6 aS ** ma y> consequently, the same superficialit j acc °mmodate a far greater number of persons than8 ° n ly partially sheltered, and where a considerable5 K

portion must frequently be altogether useless, as far as actualserviceableness is concerned. The present arrangementtherefore is to be approved of only where what is thussacrificed, with regard to mere convenience and utility, isamply atoned for by what is gained as to architecturalcharacter and effect.

We do not deny that a cortile, whether surrounded bycolumns or by arches, and whether partially or entirely so, isfavourable to scenic effect and display, and, farther, admitsof very great variety as to plan and design. This is suffi-ciently testified by examples in Italian buildings, wherecortiles frequently constitute the most striking and beautifulparts, generally picturesque and piquant, though not alwaysunexceptionable in design. But then it does not exactlyfollow, that because a cortile is beautiful as such, it is eligiblefor a purpose requiring more than a sheltered corridor aroundthe open part ; for, although that kind of shelter is sufficientfor a place of passage to and fro, it certainly does not seemto be sufficient for one intended for the assemblage of a con-course of persons, not on particular occasions, when, in caseof the weather proving unfavourable, the company may beprotected from it by awnings provided for the emergency,but daily, throughout all seasons of the year. When aplace of the kind already exists, it may conveniently andproperly enough be applied just as it is to the purpose of anExchange ; its inconvenience may, then, be put up with asunavoidable. But there is no qualifying circumstance, toreconcile us to a defect studiously adopted, voluntarilyand with premeditation, to the exclusion not only of positiveconvenience, but likewise of originality of design. Eitherour climate is most unjustly reproached, not only byforeigners, but by ourselves, or it ought at once to havebanished all idea of rebuilding the Royal Exchange upon theplan of the former one, as regards that very principal part ofit where the merchants will daily assemble, and to which allthe rest is to be considered as merely supplementary.

Be it any improvement or not, all our lately built marketsare floored with flagstone pavements, and covered in from theweather, shaded from the burning sun in summer, as well assheltered from rain and snow in winter ; nor do we believethat either the occupiers of them, or their customers, at allregret the change which has taken place. Nevertheless,with instances of that kind before their eyes, not in theMetropolis alone, but at Liverpool, Newcastle, and otherplaces, the merchants of London have decided that they areto meet for business as heretofore, within an area onlypartially and imperfectly protected from the weather. Evenbeneath the colonnades, they must be more or less exposed towind and rain, and be inconvenienced by the throng ofpersons ; whereas, by converting the central space into thepart more particularly appropriated to the transaction ofbusiness, the sides, which might still be separated from it bycolonnades, would be left free for persons passing in or out,without interruption to those engaged in business.

There may possibly be contrary reasons for not adopt-ing a mode of building securing the advantages here pointedout by us ; but they have not been brought forward byothers, nor can we divine what they can be. Hardly can itbe objected, that any plan of the kind would destroy allpeculiarity of character, by converting the Exchange itselfinto merely a spacious hall, lighted from above, which, how-ever it might be decorated, would, in its general effect,resemble any other public apartment of the same dimensions ;because, although it would no longer be a cortile—an openspace enclosed by fa§adesof external architecture—it might bekept altogether different from anything we are accustomed to,in interior architecture, and appropiately rendered sui generis