1869.] Architecture in A menca. 611 become, to the style regnant, that we fancy graces, where we might hereafter see defects. Let us look back at the daj's when Greek and Roman temples reigned, in wooden grandeur, over the land. When Justice and Cloacina appeared in the one garb ; — and who then would have thought of questioning the classic taste that willed it so ? How do we judge such a state of taste just now ? And how shall we have our vaunted efforts ridiculed, perhaps, by as unfeeling critics in the future, as we are in the present ! There is much, that we can study over, in our styles of bo-day, which may give us some idea of how we actually stand, in reference to true taste ; for, that sentiment is founded on immutable laws ; and that it is so, we should feel thankful ; because nothing, save a breach of those laws, can ever permit us to wander far from the truth ; and, should we so stray, a consideration of those laws will surely lead us back again to the point, from whence we deviated. The laws we allude to, are founded on common sense ; and, therefore, cannot lead us into error, by adhering to them. That the Renaissance is open to a vast deal of cavil, there is no doubt ; for it will not stand the test of close investi- gation, tried by those laws. So that, although we have gained much, by the adaptability of iron to ornamental archi- tecture, we have, through its means, run riot in the field of taste ; and, in endeav- oring to outdo the past, have very likely, subjected the present to a charge of absurdity. In fact, we have suffered our Art to become a mere vehicle of whim ; a thing of Fashion, to be enjoj'ed for a season, like a lady's bonnet, and then be set aside for some newer fangle, which may become popular, not on account of its intrinsic merit, but by reason of mere novelty. For, it is, unfortunately, the fact, that our most sensible architects are compelled to follow in the track of the triumphal car of Fashion, or linger idly b3' the wayside. Be necessitas, our professional brethren— while deploring the rule under which they have to act — "For those who live to please, Must please to live" — yield to the necessity, and go forward with the rest. But, while we seemingly acquiesce hi this state of false sentiment, into which our art-age appears to have lapsed, would it not be desirable to forget our foreign standard-bearers ; and struggle, on our own account, for the true issue? If our European models are not alive to the requirements of true taste and sound judgment, why should American archi- tects be so devoid of national feeling, as to forego their own opinions ; and yield to those of others ? We see no reason for such a state of things. That there is much that is beautiful in the Renaissance, we will not pretend to den}' ; but, that there is much that is frivolous, puerile, and wholly unworthy of a solid, simple Republic, such as ours, we stoutly aver. The gaudy frippery, that glitters round a throne, is out of place in our atmosphere ; and whilst we mirror the fashion as it is, we feel free to question the sense of it ; for, its pres- ence is oftentimes in direct antagonism with the laws, by which sound Archi- tectural Design is governed. The truth is, and we shrink not to declare it, that our brethren, on this Continent, do not exert their native independence, nor exercise their inven- tive taste, which (in view of those laws, that should never be infringed) would give them character, at home and abroad. Is there any reason, why American architects should be no more than copy- ists of European models ? We think not. They would, undoubtedly, be more respected by the age they live in, as well as by ages } r et to come, if their works carried more the stamp of origi- nality, in fact, were truly American, un-
