In making these remarks it is not intended to attack the principles competitions are based ; properly con ducted, their tendency is unquestionably, not only to call out the talent and genius of the experienced artist, but to rouse a spirit of emulation in the young professor, as an assistance in encouraging rising merit, which without such a stimulus might possibly remain undeveloped, or, without such a means of exercise, unknown and unappreciated.
There may be many advantages attending architectural competitions, but there is so total a want of security, under the operation of the present defective system, so general an impression existing. whether justly or not, that fairness and impartiality in the decisions cannot always be relied upon, that the great body of the profession hold themselves aloof from entering an arena w here lifir play is. to say the least, doulitful. The competition for the Roy al Exchange, it is to be lamented, afforded an,,t11,d. proof, if proof were wanting, of the truth of these observations.
It is not our purpose to enter on a discussion of the merits of a controversy which tilled many pages of the periodicals more especially devoted to recording matters connected With architecture and hot we think we cannot Pass to a description of the New Exchange without slightly notieing the manner in w hieh the design for it was selected, or its architect appointed.
The following are extracts from the— Resolutions of the Gresham Committee. as to Instructions to the .,irchitects.
"1. That architects be invited to offer designs for the re building of the Ifoyal Exchange. in general eomDut:iiuu.and that i•reininnis be ot1;.•red for three designs adjudged by the Committee to be the best.
" 3. That the new building be of the Grecian. Roman, or Italian sty le of architecture, having each front Of stone of a hard and durable quality.
" That a specification be required to accompany each giving a general description of the building, and such other information as cannot be clearly shown OH t 110 CirM Stating also what stone, or other material, are proposed fir use in the different parts of the building. and specifying par ticularly the estimated expense of earrying the designs into execution in the most substantial and complete manner in every respect for occupation, the expense not to exceed
.£150,000.
" 10. That 101' the desirm for which the Committee shall award the first premium, the sum of £300 shall be given ; that for the second design the sum of £:200 ; and for the third the sum of .£100. The suecesstill competitor, to whom the first premium is awarded shall not he comm Sidyroil as having, necessarily a claim to be entrusted with the execu tion of the wok ; but if' not so employed, and his deigns are carried into execution, a further sum of shall be paid to him—the Committee retaining possession of all drawings which the premiums have been given.
11. That if' reasonable doubts should arise in the mindp of the Committee as to the practicability of carry Me. intc execution the successful design for the amount of the esti mated expense of the building, the Committee shall be at liberty to call upon the party to give sufficient satisrac tory proof or the accuracy of the calculations, and to with hold the premium, and reject the designs unless such proof be After issuing these Instructions, the Committee appointed three architects—Sir Robert Smirke, Mr. (wilt, and Mr llardwick, to examine and advise on the designs which might be sent in. Above fifty eompetitors appeared. and the above gentlemen, after due examination. made a report to the Committee, from which we extract the passages.
" In the first class, those that we think may be executed for £150,000. we beg to report as follows : First . No. 36 Second . . „ 43 Third .
Fourth .
Fifth • .
"In the second class, or that in which we consider the cost would vastly exceed the sum of £150,000, equal impracti cabilities of execution with those of the first class are to be (band ; and, notwithstanding the very great talent they exhi bit, there arc circumstances of inconvenience and unsuitable ness which would bring them, as we conceive, into the pre dicament of being 'inadvisable for adoption. wish it, therefbre. to be understood, that We report on them respec tively as the works of very clever artists. who have produced pieces of competition in which, besides the cirennistances above-mentioned, stability arising from solid bearings fid• upper alairtments, and other essential nurttcrs. have been sacrificed to ,rand architectural features.